





3/>3^ 












1»»^ 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. # £ 



j> :> 3> ^>_ 



^^ef '......1)J.3 # 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.! 



$38. 






>^^ 






:>:>i>?<=^ 

^^^?^^ 
;>:>>%^^ 

:^^^i>^- 

>~>^:?^ _ 



> ' .JL> :»> ^s^3:> 3l>^> J^ 



^^ 






'f'-^^ -^^^^'^ 






m^' 






1D>» 


















K^:^^' 






,¥3 



»^^^ 






m 









5^ 



i^ 






2>>i3^- 









^3)'^^^^^;; 









>3grl 






>^i^^^^Bll: 



x:x»>2>L)^c^^ 






^Ife^ 



^^^ 



jf 



^l>m 






THE 

MODERN SABBATH 
EXAMINED. 



THE 



MODERN SABBATH 

'1 










EXAMINED. /4vf^ 



Tie Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants. AVhatsocver else they believe besides it, and the plain, 
irrefragable, indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it, as a matter of opinion ; but as matter of faith and 
religion, neither can they with coherence to their own groimds, believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, 
without most high and most schismatical presumption. 

CHILLINGWORTH. 



LONDON : 

WHITTAKER, TREACHER AND ARNOT. 

MDCCCXXXII. 



^i 



\0 



:^i^ 



IBmiitts hv 

HARRISON AND CROSFIELD, MARKET STREET, MANCHESTER. 



PREFACE. 



The object of the ensuing treatise is to institute an 
examination of the arguments usually adduced in 
support of the doctrine of the perpetuity of the 
weekly sabbath^ under the Christian dispensation. 
The writer has aimed at pursuing the important 
inquiry involved in this examination, in the spirit 
recommended by the immortal Locke, '' to bring to 
our studies, and to our inquiries after knowledge, a 
mind covetous of truth, that seeks after nothing 
else, and after that impartially, and embraces it, how 
poor, how contemptible, how unfashionable soever 
it may seem ;" and he trusts, that by those who 
may feel disposed to pursue for themselves, the in- 
vestigation of the Sabbatarian question, in the same 
spirit, the results of his studies, now submitted to 
their notice, will be found not altogether undeser- 
ving of consideration. 

It may be requisite to state at the outset, that 

A 



IV PREFACE. 

the question examined in the following pages, is 
not the expediency of a periodical intermission of 
public labour, but the existing obligation of the 
sabbatical law, viewed as an ordinance of revealed 
religion. Every one who is sincerely concerned to 
make the will of Heaven the governing rule of his 
religious obedience, will, doubtless, readily admit, 
that to ascertain whether the perpetual observance 
of a weekly day of rest be really a part of the re- 
vealed will of God, is a matter infinitely paramount 
in importance, to all considerations whatever of 
mere secular expediency. 

It may be proper to premise also, that as the subject 
has been treated purely on religious grounds, it has 
been taken for granted, that whatever conclusion rela- 
tive to it, can be correctly deduced from an accurate 
survey of scriptural evidence, such conclusion must, 
in as far as the interests of the Christian religion are 
concerned, be of all others, ultimately found the most 
expedient in practice. On the assumption that 
this proposition is indubitably correct, the principles 
derived from scriptural authority have been followed 
into all their natural and necessary consequences, 
without any anxiety being felt for the issue, as it 



PREFACE. V 

respects the interests of true practical piety. The 
chief business that men have with Christianity^ the 
writer conceives is, to believe what it reveals, and to 
practise what it enjoins. So soon as it is ascer- 
tained what is the revealed will of heaven in re- 
gard to any point of faith or practice, there is then 
plainly that ascertained which it must be most ex- 
pedient for men to believe and to obey. As obe- 
dience to the revealed will of God comprehends the 
whole sum of the duty which man owes to his Crea- 
tor, it is surely warrantable to assume, that the con- 
sequences of complying with this rule of duty, may 
safely be left to Him who has delivered it, and 
who, in doing so, knew the end from the beginning. 
In examining any religious observance which 
claims our notice, we are very apt to consider, 
first, its supposed tendency, and in this way, to 
allow the views we form of the results expected to 
follow from its adoption, to influence, or perhaps 
determine our conclusions respecting its divine au- 
thority and obligation. To pursue this course, is, 
evidently, much more natural, than first of all, to 
inquire dispassionately, without any regard to an- 
ticipated consequences, what actually has been com- 



VI PREFACE. 



manded. Most men readily admits that the diffusion 
of truth must be accompanied with beneficial results, 
and all naturally wish to have the truth upon their 
side: there appear to be extremely few, how- 
ever, who adopt the only plan that can ever ra- 
tionally be expected to conduct them to the side 
of truth. There are comparatively few indeed, 
who are at all aware of the difficulty that is 
found, in cultivating a habit of instituting the in- 
quiry. What is true ? previous to proceeding to the 
inquiry. What is expedient ? or who have any 
adequate impression of the importance of carefully 
observing this order, and invariably adhering to it 
as a rule, in all their investigations of moral and re- 
ligious subjects. That it requires constant self- 
jealousy, and the exercise of a resolute spirit, as 
well as a firm faith in the unfailing resources of 
simple truth, habitually to think and act on the 
conviction that, whatever is true in point of fact, 
must in every case be found, in the long run, the 
most expedient as the governing rule of human con- 
duct, no one who has ever made the attempt, ho- 
nestly, and unwaveringly, to adhere to this convic- 
tion, needs to be reminded. 



PREFACE. Vll 

A fair dealing with evidence being at the foundation 
of all correct thinking on moral and religious sub- 
jects, as well as on all others, it is manifest, that it is 
only by the general cultivation of a love of truth for 
its own sake, and by a steadfast adherence to it 
wherever it may conduct us, that the cause of true 
scriptural religion can ever be expected to make 
progress in the world : and it is not less plain, that 
it is by the use of the same means alone, that we 
can reasonably expect to see the cause of religious 
error and delusion effectually exposed and over- 
thrown. By free and temperate discussion, carried 
on in the spirit referred to, truth must advance, 
and ultimately prevail : and it is certain, that in 
whatever way the temporary interests of individuals 
may be affected by the promotion of this great end, 
in its accomplishment men in general are deeply in- 
terested, whether they be willing to acknowledge it or 
not. That the general diffusion and prevalence of 
moral and religious truth, must be productive, even- 
tually, of a greater amount of real happiness to man- 
kind than the most skilfully constructed system of 
modified truth and error that ever was devised, cannot 
for a moment be doubted, without incurring a serious 



VIU PREFACE. 

hazard of being ultimately latided in the dreary 
regions of universal scepticism. The whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth upon every* subject, 
is the very life of all manly thought, and inde- 
pendence of character ; this alone, the plain truth, 
pure and unadulterated, free to all, and knovrn by 
all, is the sole stable source of v^^ell-being we can 
put confidence in, as it regards the permanent pros- 
perity of communities whether civil or religious. 

On a subject which has so frequently been handled 
by writers of celebrity, it is unreasonable now to 
look for much novelty either in point of matter or 
illustration. It has been a principal object aimed 
at by the present writer, carefully to separate 
that portion of the evidence which is clear and 
indubitable, from that part which is dubious or 
merely conjectural ; and by bringing forward in this 
way, a connected series of facts and principles bear- 
ing on the question, to enable the reader to draw 
for himself, from incontrovertible premises, legiti- 
mate and satisfactory inferences. In pursuing this 
undertaking, he has not trusted solely to his own 
resources, but has availed himself, without scruple, 
of the researches of former writers, whenever he 



PREFACE. IX 

found them answerable for his purpose. In the 
particular track of thought and argument, which, 
in the present case, has been followed out with 
a view to elucidate the subject, the author is not 
aware that he has been preceded by any former 
writer : and although the same views of the sabba- 
tical ordinance, that are maintained throughout the 
work, have been taken by various well-known writers, 
and were common, indeed, to the Christian Church, 
during the four first centuries, it is not probable, he 
thinks, that all the conclusions he has attempted to 
establish, were ever previously maintained precisely 
on the same grounds. 

Having in no instance dealt, designedly, unfairly 
with evidence, or resorted to sophistical reasoning, 
he has not felt called upon to exercise any forbear- 
ance towards weak, sophistical arguments, employed 
by others, whenever such arguments came in his 
way. In venturing to call in question the tenable- 
ness of some positions assumed as established, by va- 
rious writers of distinguished reputation, it is hoped 
he will not be found justly chargeable with any rash 
and unbeseeming dogmatism. He is not aware that 
he has advanced a single opinion of any importance. 



X PREFACE. 

with confidence, without assigning what he con- 
ceives to be a sufficient reason for holding it. If 
the reasons he has assigned can be shown to be fu- 
tile, or in any way insufficient for the purposes in 
support of which they have been brought forward, 
he will, in all sincerity, be greatly pleased to see the 
fallacies with which they may be chargeable, ex- 
posed. Obsolete, and unfashionable, as doubtless, 
several of the opinions he has contended for, may, 
correctly enough, at present be deemed, he must be 
allowed to claim the right of appealing, in their sup- 
port, from the authority of names and numbers, to 
the authority of sound reasoning founded on princi- 
ples derived from the scriptures of truth. That in 
a treatise, embracing such a wide range of discus- 
sion, on a subject of acknowledged difficulty, — a 
subject, moreover, upon which the most able and 
learned writers have hitherto differed widely in 
opinion, he has not in some unessential points, laid 
himself open to correction, he is not so self-confident 
as sanguinely to presume. He may be allowed, 
however, to express it to be his well-weighed, and 
long-matured conviction, that viewed as a whole, 
the arguments in disproof of any sabbatical law 



PREFACE. XI 

under the Christian economy, admit of no solid or 
satisfactory answer : and he begs to state, that were 
this not his present conscientious opinion, no known 
consideration would induce him to allow the follow- 
ing pages to see the light. 

He now commends them to the blessing of God, 
and to the candid reception of the lovers of truth. 



CONTENTS. 



SEC. Page 

Introduction 1 

I. The political regulation of a periodical intermission of 

public labour, distinguished from the law of the 
Sabbath viewed as a Divine Institution 5 

II. On the supposed transference of the weekly Sabbath 

from the Jewish to the Christian economy, at the 
introduction of the Gospel 35 

III. Tlie Scriptural evidence relative to the existing obliga- 

tion of the law of the Sabbath further considered. 83 

IV. On the views entertained of the first day of the week, 

during the first ages of the Christian Church ; and 
on the causes which led to the general adoption 
of the Modern Sabbatarian Doctrine in England, 
during the seventeenth century 121 

V. On the practice of using the Judaical Decalogue as 

the rule of Christian duty 167 

VI. The grounds on which the Modern Sabbath is sup- 
posed to rest examined in detail 211 

Note 273 

Appendix 279 



THE 



MODERN SABBATH 
EXAMINED. 



INTRODUCTION, 

On all the leading questions connected with the 
divine institution of a weekly sabbath : concerning 
the period when the law was first promulgated^ con- 
cerning its original design, as well as concerning its 
perpetuity under the christian economy, there has 
hitherto prevailed amongst religious writers, a wide, 
and apparently an incurable diversity of opinion. 
While, by one class of writers, it has been main- 
tained that the sabbath was instituted at the creation, 
and that its observance having been designed for 
mankind in general, continues to be binding on all 
men, in every age of the world ; it has been main- 
tained by others, that the institution was originally, 

B 



delivered to the Hebrew nation, and that the ob- 
servance of its rigorous prescriptions vv^as primarily 
designed to subserve purposes peculiar to the Mosaic 
dispensation of religion. Those v^ho have adopted 
the latter view^ of the ordinance, conceive that the 
law was promulgated to the Jewish people alone, 
and was abrogated upon the introduction of the gos- 
pel, along with that economy with which it had 
originally been incorporated. 

The controversies that have at different periods 
been agitated respecting these and some other col- 
lateral questions, have usually terminated without 
any satisfactory determination of the principal points 
at issue : and although for a considerable time past, 
there has been an appearance of general acquies- 
cence in that view of the subject, at present publicly 
maintained in this country, there have transpired of 
late years numerous indications of a very unsettled 
state of the public mind upon the subject ; and it is 
well known, that even among religious persons, by 
whom the duty implied in the prevailing doctrine, 
is observed, there exists a considerable difference of 
opinion regarding the real grounds of the religious 
obhgation they profess to recognize. 

It cannot reasonably be expected that this diver- 
sity of opinion will ever be removed, or that the 
controversy will ever be brought to a satisfactory 
issue, so long as the discussion continues to be en- 
cumbered, as has heretofore been the case, with 



3 

questions of a secular nature^ which however im- 
portant of themselves^ rest upon other grounds, 
and are wholly independent of that scriptural evi- 
dence^ by which alone the religious question of the 
existing obligation of the sabbatical law can ever be 
decisively determined. It seems to be extremely 
desirable, therefore, that the testimony of scripture 
respecting the original design and perpetuity of the 
institution, should be carefully and dispassionately 
examined, vdthout any reference to the legislative 
enactments of civil governments. Whatever differ- 
ence of opinion may have hitherto prevailed respect- 
ing the theological question, it may safely be affirmed, 
that the expediency of intermitting public labour 
one day in the week, is on all sides readily admitted, 
and that in no quarter, does there exist any desire 
to see the existing regulation upon this point, ma- 
terially altered or repealed. 

It is manifest, that apart from all considerations 
of its religious obligation, the observance of a day 
of public rest, confers a very valuable privilege on 
all classes of the community. The regular recur- 
rence of a day of relaxation from the exhausting 
labours of life, is greatly conducive both to bodily 
health and to mental vigour : it lightens by the 
prospect it affords of a temporary cessation of 
unintermitting application, the burden which the 
labouring man is obliged daily to bear, while it al- 
leviates the fatigue of all those wearisome avocations 



in which the bulk of mankind find it necessary to 
engage. To all who are thus circumstanced, it is 
an unspeakable satisfaction to possess the privilege 
of at all times looking forward to a j^obit, at which 
they may suspend their exertions, and recruit their 
exhausted powers : it nerves them for vigorous and 
persevering application to know that the day which 
they can call their own will shortly return, in which 
they may again repose from the fatiguing labours 
of the week, and enjoy endearing intercourse with 
their families and friends. A day of this kind, it is 
obvious, affords numerous opportunities, not only for 
the natural exercise of the social ajQPections and for 
all the enjoyments of domestic intercourse, but 
also for mental cultivation, and the diffusion of ge- 
neral as well as religious knowledge : and it cannot 
be doubted, that if these opportunities be judiciously 
employed, they must conduce greatly to the pro- 
gress of society in civilization and in the attainment 
of every kind of valuable information, as well as to 
the amelioration of the general condition of the 
human race. 



SECTION I. 

THE POLITICAL REGULATION OF A PERIODICAL INTER- 
MISSION OF PUBLIC LABOUR, DISTINGUISHED FROM THE 
LAW OF THE SABBATH, VIEWED AS A DIVINE INSTITUTION. 

The observance of a weekly day of public rest may 
be viewed either as a religious ordinance, or as a 
political regulation. As a religious ordinance, it can 
derive its existence solely from a revelation of the 
divine will, and in this point of view, the law, if it 
exists, must be of indispensable obligation indepen- 
dent of any enactment of civil society. As a political 
regulation, it has its origin and foundation in the 
will of the community, and as such, may, without 
any infringement of the principles of religious li- 
berty, be enforced on all men without regard to 
their private religious opinions. 

It is very desirable that this distinction between 
the religious and the political character of the law 
should be accurately understood and constantly kept 
in view throughout every inquiry into its nature 
and obligation. To many persons, this, and other 
questions of a similar nature, naturally appear 
extremely complicated and confused, on account of 



6 

their being habitually viewed, in connexion with the 
existing regulations of civil society. Owing to the 
adoption of a form of Christianity, as the religion of 
the state, and the consequent blending together of 
various civil and religious matters, which ought to 
have been kept for ever apart,^ the distinctive cha- 



* It is gratifying to notice that the important truth referred to and other 
truths connected with it, have recently been openly avowed in a quarter, where 
we should naturally have little expected to see them so distinctly recog- 
nized, We refer to a very original and able volume of sermons lately published 
by Dr. Arnold, Head ^Master of Rugby School, and late Fellow of Oriel College, 
Oxford. " The christian unity then," says this nervous writer, referring to the 
original state and character of the christian church, as it existed in New Testa- 
ment times, " was a unity of goodness, an affection of good men for one another, 
because they mutually loved God. But so soon as this was changed for another 
sort of unity in which bad men could also be partakers : when christians strove 
not to put down the principles of the world, but to employ them for the increase 
of the number of those who were called believers, but who were not so in heart, 
so soon as they borrowed some of the notions of the law of Moses, and some of 
those of worldly kingdoms, thinking that they were enlarging the kingdom of 
God, by persuading Satan's servants merely to change the name of their master 
without changing the spirit of their worship, then the unity of which St. Paul 
spoke so earnestly was lost : and men ceased to be one with each other in the 
Father and the Son. The purpose for which Christ's Church was founded, so 
far as this world was concerned, the advancement of that kingdom of God, for 
whose coming we daily pray became presently stopped." "This bears" continues 
this writer in an appended note, " upon a vast subject, and one of the greatest 
importance both to the temporal and spiritual advancement of the nations of 
Europe, the history of the nominal conversion of the northern nations to Christianity, 
when they settled themselves in the several provinces of the Roman Empire. 
The adoption of Christianity as the national religion in point of form and profes- 
sion of opinions, while its spirit- and principles were either unknown or hated, 
has introduced a confusion into our civil and ecclesiastical relations, under which 
we are at this present moment labouring. It has led for instance to the maintenance 
of these two inconsistent propositions by the very same persons : — thatthe govern- 
ment may interfere in church matters, because in a christian country the 



racters of the religious and the poHtical law of the 
sabbath, appear difficult with precision to be defined. 
In reality however, they have no real or necessary 
connexion. 

As the government of God and the government of 
man rest upon different grounds, so have they distinct 
provinces of legislation ; and though the laws of 
each may agree sometimes in their letter, they 
differ materially both in their spirit and in the 
nature of the sanctions by which they are respectively 
enforced. The foundation of the divine government 
is to be found in the perfect and unchangeable will of 
God : human legislation is founded on the principles 
of natural equity and on those considerations of 
expediency which every society, in conducting its 
own concerns, has a right to adopt. All matters of a 
religious nature, whether of religious behef or of re- 
ligious duty, belong, as such, to the divine govern- 
ment, and are beyond the cognizance of human 
legislation. The business of human government is to 
protect life and property, and to promote the general 
well-being of the community. Men's actions are the 
proper subjects of human legislation : their religious 
belief lies between God and their own consciences. 



government is to be considered as christian, and the king must be a member of 
the church ; and yet that Christianity does not meddle with political institutions, 
with forms of government, questions of public rights, legislation, war and peace, 
&c., because Christ's kingdom is not of this world," 

Arnold's Sermons, p. 88. 2nd. Edit. 1830. 



s 



It is no where intimated in the New Testament 
writings, that the christian revelation was designed 
to aid the nations of the earth in the management of 
their own affairs, neither does Christianity deUver 
any opinion upon the respective merits of the va- 
rious systems of political government which dif- 
ferent nations have thought it proper to devise. 
Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and its 
institutions, as delivered in the New Testament, 
stand wholly apart from all matters of a political 
nature. Christ indeed taught men to render unto 
Csesar the things that are Ceesar's, and unto God the 
things that are God's : but it is indubitable, that, 
while Christianity thus recognizes civil government 
itself^ as a lawful institution, and an ordinance of 
heaven which ought to be respected and obeyed, it 
leaves every separate nation or society, to adopt that 
particular form of government, and those municipal 
regulations which, under different circumstances may 
be found best fitted to promote the general good 
of the community. 

Human legislation being thus founded on consider- 
ations of expediency, and its object being simply to 
advance the general well-being of society, it must be 
the duty and business of every community to adopt 
such regulations as are considered most conducive 
to the real interests of the majority of the people. 
It is obvious that in every nation at all advanced in 
civilization, or acquainted in any moderate measure 



with the nature and objects of human government, 
a principal share of the laws will be founded on those 
principles of natural justice which^ as divine laws^ are 
obligatory on all men, independent of any specific 
enactment either human or divine. As every moral 
law is from its own nature obligatory on the human 
conscience, it is manifest that all civil enactments 
which are founded on the principles of truth and 
equity, must in one sense be both laws of God and 
laws of man. All statutes that relate to matters 
of right and wrong among neighbours, for instance, 
have a foundation in the moral duty of loving our 
neighbour as ourselves : and on the principle, 
that they decide equitably between man and man, 
are with manifest propriety recognized by the le- 
gislature of every civilized nation. 

It is to be observed, however, that though laws of 
this description are in one sense both divine and 
human, the obedience they respectively require, 
is enforced by sanctions which differ materially in 
their nature and operation. The divine government 
respects the human conscience : it recognizes no 
obedience which is not voluntarily offered, and its 
laws are sanctioned, not by present pains and penal- 
ties, but by the promise of future rewards, and the 
threatening of future punishments. As it is utterly 
impossible to compel the compliance of the heart, 
man, as the subject of the divine governm.ent, can be 
acted upon only through the medium of his reason 



10 

and conscience : the infliction of human penalties 
may secure an outward conformity with the letter of 
a law, but it cannot, in the nature of things, procure 
that willing compliance with the spirit of its precepts 
which the government of God requires. 

The government of man respects overt acts : its 
design is to lay those restraints on the conduct of 
individuals which are considered necessary for the 
protection of the rights of the community, and it 
makes no laws to which it cannot by physical co- 
ercion, infallibly secure an outward obedience. 

It may be proper to remark, that the preceding 
statement of principles, is meant to apply solely to 
the religion of Christ, as taught in the New Testa- 
ment writings, and to those systems of human govern- 
ment which recognize the principles of civil and 
religious freedom. It has no reference to that 
theocratic government erected among the Jewish 
nation, in which matters sacred and secular were 
designedly and inseparably interwoven ; the go- 
vernment having been constructed on the principle 
of comprehending a system of peculiar religious 
worship and civil polity. Neither is it meant to 
apply to those modern systems of civil and ec- 
clesiastical dominion, in which a particular form 
of religion is established and supported by secu- 
lar enactments, and made use of as an instrument 
in accomplishing the purposes of the executive 
government : and under w^hich, a right of coercion. 



11 

even in spiritual matters^ is claimed over all who 
are within the limits of its assumed jurisdiction. 
Christianity disowns every system of this kind^ by 
whatever name it may be called, and expressly refuses 
the proffered aid of every kind of worldly influence, 
as well as the support of all the secular enactments 
of the kingdoms of this world.^ It recognizes those 
individuals only to be its subjects, whose consciences 
are in subjection to the authority of Christ : and as 
its laws can be obeyed only from a principle of love, 
it is impossible that a compliance with them can be 
compelled by any coercive power on earth. 

The assumption of a right, indeed, by ecclesiastical 
bodies, to legislate for men in spiritual matters, and 
of a power to enforce religious decrees by compulsory 
enactments, resolves itself into a government purely 
secular in its character : for by whatever name these 
bodies may be designated, so soon as the attempt is 
made to employ the sanction of physical coercion, 
their nature is determined and ascertained to be dis- 
tinctly worldly and political. There is no medium 
between the principle of force, which is the foundation 
of political power, and that moral influence which is 
the sole instrument that can be exerted on man as a 
rational, accountable being, the subject of the divine 
government. 

In those countries in which a religious sect has 

*" John xxiii. 36 & 37, 



12 

been established by law^ and its religious forms 
incorporated with the civil government, although 
the legislature may enact statutes professedly of a 
religious nature, it can only enforce them by such 
compulsory penalties as entirely annihilate their spi- 
ritual character. The observance of a weekly day 
of public rest, for instance, no doubt had its 
origin, as a municipal regulation of this country, in 
religious motives : but though it w^as probably view- 
ed by the civil legislature, at the period of its enact- 
ment, as a religious obligation, it is utterly impossi- 
ble that it can ever be enforced as a religious duty 
by the sword of the civil magistracy. As a law of 
the land, the obedience it requires can be compelled 
by the infliction of the same penalties which secure 
the observance of any other enactment : it is clear 
however, that no infliction of penalties can secure 
more than an outward obedience to the injunction 
of a cessation from public labour. The authority 
of the magistrate extends to every overt act which 
violates the laws of the state, or disturbs the peace 
of society, but it cannot be brought to bear on the 
human conscience. It is manifest therefore, that it 
is only as a municipal regulation, that the observance 
of a day of public rest can ever be enforced by the 
civil power. 

There is, thus, a broad and palpable distinction 
between the observance of a day of rest, viewed as 
a religious ordinance, and viewed as a municipal 



13 

regulation : and it is obvious that the one law has 
no necessary connexion with the other. If the ob- 
servance of a weekly sabbath be a religious ordi- 
nance of divine appointment^ men unquestionably 
owe it obedience from a regard to divine authority : 
but whether or not this be a divine commandment, 
so long as a cessation from public labour is com- 
manded by the civil legislature, men are unques- 
tionably bound to comply with the observance, as 
the law^ of the land. If there exists, under the 
Christian economy, any obligation to sanctify a de- 
terminate portion of time, the disciples of Christ 
are bound to recognize it, independent of all se- 
cular enactments whatever : the existence of an 
obligation of this kind, however, (supposing for a 
moment that such an obligation does really exist,) 
cannot possibly take away the right of society to 
adopt the regulation of enforcing the observance of 
a day of public rest, if the regulation be considered 
conducive to the w^ell-being of the community. To 
determine certain days and hours for public labour, is 
a duty which every enlightened and humane legis- 
lature w'ill always consider it to be its bounden 
business to discharge : and so long as it may seem 
convenient and advantageous to society, to intermit 
public labour a whole day in every seven, there can 
be no reasonable objection advanced against the 
adoption of such a regulation^ or to its general enforce- 
ment by magisterial authority. That the expediency 



14 

of the regulation is the only tenable ground on 
which^ as a law of man^ the observance of a day of 
rest can^^ver with consistency be placed^ seems 
thus to be alike clear and indubitable : it is only 
in fact, as a political regulation, that men, as 
members of civil society, are concerned with the 
matter : as a religious obligation, it lies between 
God and their own consciences. 

There have been some writers however, who w^hile 
they admit that it is not within the province of civil 
government to ordain that every person should ex- 
ercise himself in the duties of religion on the sabbath 
day, have maintained, that it is nevertheless the 
bounden and sacred duty of civil governors to pro- 
vide, that all persons should on that day, have 
the liberty, means, and opportunity of doing so. 
These waiters maintain that the civil legislature is 
warranted in assuming the religious obligation of 
keeping a sabbath, and in assuming also the common 
consent of christians respecting it : these assumptions, 
they conceive, may reasonably be made the ground 
and reason of a civil enactment. 

It is to be observed, however, that if the assumptions 
referred to, be expressed in the statute : if they be 
assigned as the ground of its enactment, and as the 
reason for its being enforced, it will be difficult to 
justify the law^ on the principles of sound government, 
or to defend it from the charge of infringing on the 
rights of private conscience. The introduction of a 



15 

religious doctrine into a political enactment, and an 
assumption that all the members of the state recog- 
nize the obligation implied in it, seem to be incon- 
sistent alike with the principles of religious freedom^ 
and with all correct views of the nature and objects 
of civil legislation. Concerning the doctrine of the 
perpetuity of the sabbath, from which is derived the 
obligation which, in this case, is proposed to form 
the ground and reason of a civil statute, there has 
hitherto existed a great difference of opinion : and 
it seems to be very improbable, that with a contro- 
verted religious question like this, men, as members 
of civil society should have any legitimate concern. 
In every free government, where there are no civil 
distinctions made on account of men's different reli- 
gious opinions, it must be alike unjust and inconsis- 
tent, to assume the obligation of a controverted 
religious doctrine as a proper reason for the enactment 
of a civil statute. It is obvious that every member of 
the state, who dissents from the doctrine on which 
this obligation is founded, has a just reason of com- 
plaint, that he is called upon to give his consent to 
the enactment of a law, which implies the existence 
of a religious doctrine to which he is conscientiously 
opposed. To ground the law of the sabbath as a 
political regulation upon an antecedent religious 
obligation, would not be felt to be any grievance, so 
long as all the members of the state admitted the 
existence of this obligation, (although even then, the 



legislature would appear to be transgressing the 
limits of its legitimate jurisdiction,) but so soon as 
any individual member of the state dissented from the 
doctrine on which this obligation was founded, the 
ground on which the law rested, would,, as regarded 
him, be wholly subverted, and the enactment would 
necessarily become an odious interference with the 
rights of private conscience. 

Every person has just grounds of complaint, who 
is precluded as a citizen of a particular community, 
from exercising his allotted share in the formation 
of the lavv's of the state, unless he submit to a com- 
promise of his religious principles. A legislative 
body calling itself a protestant parliament, may in- 
deed assume the antecedent religious obligations of 
the protestant sabbath, with some colour of consis- 
tency ; but to assume this obligation, and to assign 
it as a valid reason for enacting a municipal regula- 
tion, in a country where religious distinctions are 
professedly abolished, is to do a manifest injustice to 
every Roman Catholic member of the legislature, 
and to every other member of it, who dissents from 
the doctrine, on which, the assumed obligation is 
founded. It is no doubt true, that every system of 
civil government, which, while it professes to recog- 
nize the rights of private conscience, undertakes to 
provide not only for the support of a particular reli- 
gious sect, (and what are the churches of Rome and 
England, and other similar bodies, but particular 



17 

sects, that is, sections or divisions of the professedly 
christian community ?) but also to legislate in spiritual 
matters for its adherents, must necessarily he charge- 
able with numerous glaring inconsistencies : for these 
inconsistencies, however, the principles of civil and 
religious freedom are in no degree answxrable. It is 
apart altogether from every erroneous, incongruous 
system of this kind that we contend, that on the prin- 
ciples of an equality of civil rights, and the removal 
of all civil distinctions on account of men's religious 
opinions, it must be wholly inconsistent to place the 
secular enactment which enjoins the observance of a 
day of public rest, on any other foundation than its 
recognized expediency. To attempt to increase the 
authority and stability of the law, as some persons 
have endeavoured to do, by refusing to recognize 
the expediency of the regulation as its proper foun- 
dation, and to substitute a religious doctrine, as the 
proper ground on which it ought to rest, is obviously 
to remove it from a foundation of rock, and to 
place it on one of sand. 

The world has been slow to learn the plain but 
important truth, that men's actions, and not men's 
opinions, are the proper subjects of human legislation. 
As the object of civil government is simply to protect 
the rights and to promote the temporal well-being of 
society, all that the civil legislature has to do with 
religion, is merely to protect from molestation every 
member of the state, in the exercise of his own con- 



18 

victions of religious duty, so long as the exercise of 
this duty does not interfere with the peace and secu- 
rity of the community. On the other hand, the dis- 
ciples of Christ require nothing of the civil legislature 
but that which, as citizens, they have a right to 
demand : namely the protection of their lives, their 
properties, and privileges as members of the com- 
munity : and it is only indeed as members of civil 
society, and not in any religious capacity, that 
christians ought ever to interfere in questions of 
a political nature. It would have been well for the 
cause of religious truth, as well as for the cause of 
civil and religious freedom, if these principles had 
been sooner recognized by civil governments, and 
by the professors of the christian name. Many 
well-meaning persons appear to have yet to learn, 
that the religion of Christ peremptorily refuses the 
proffered support of all the governments of this 
world : and that to attempt to establish it by 
human legislation, is to convert it into a state re- 
ligion, one of the worst of all political engines. 

There are some persons, however, who though they 
are decidedly opposed to the incorporation of any 
form of Christianity with civil governments, and pro- 
fess to be warmly attached to the principles of religi- 
ous liberty, refuse to follow these principles into all 
their natural and necessary consequences in as far as 
the sabbath is concerned. On this subject they seem 
afraid and unwilling to carry their own system con- 



19 

sistently into operation ; and, by attempting to com- 
promise the matter, and to identify the sabbatical 
law with duties of a moral nature, they involve 
themselves in innumerable perplexities and apparent 
difficulties, which have no foundation, save their own 
groundless fears and imaginations. They conceive, 
that the sabbath is a legitimate subject for human 
legislation; — that the institution, in its very na- 
ture, requires the concurrence of the magistrate, 
being, in part, a political institution, having rela- 
tion to man as the subject of human government:- — 
that, as there is a law of property antecedent to 
all the provisions of specific statutes, which says, 
' Thou shalt not steal,' — a law which human au- 
thority may enforce, but cannot reverse, so there 
is a law of the sabbath, which, being founded, 
as they suppose, on eternal moral obligations, neither 
church nor state can originate or set aside. They 
conceive, that were it otherwise, the National As- 
sembly of France committed no crime, when they 
set aside the hebdomadal division of time, and adopted 
a computation by decades. 

The necessity which, by these persons, is supposed 
to exist for the recognition by civil governments of 
the sabbatical institution, rests wholly, it is to be ob- 
served, on the assumption, that their own view of the 
moral and universal obligation of the law of the sab- 
bath, is incontrovertibly established. That this law 
however, is a moral duty at all, or that it is now 



20 

founded on eternal moral obligations, are pure gratu- 
itous assertions^ whicli^ in the judgment of many 
persons, it is impossible satisfactorily to prove. 

We are unable to perceive that there exists any 
proper reason for the civil legislature intermeddling 
with this, or with any similar religious dispute : 
neither can we discover any difficulty whatever in the 
case, if matters are simply allowed to remain on their 
respective, proper, and only tenable footings; namely, 
the religious obligation, if it exists, on the testimony 
of scripture; and the municipal regulation of inter- 
mitting public labour, on the broad principle of 
acknowledged general expediency. 

That the civil power is under an obligation to re- 
cognize the existence of any one positive religious 
law under the christian dispensation, is a proposition 
destitute of all colour of rational probability, and as 
we hope in the sequel to show, of all legitimate 
scriptural proof. The appointment of a deter- 
minate portion of time to be sanctified to God's 
worship and service, is a duty, it is to be re- 
membered, which can derive its obligation solely 
from the promulgation of an express precept : and, 
consequently, the duty itself is of a positive, and not 
of a moral nature. There is an important difference, 
therefore, between the nature of the law of the sab- 
bath, and the nature of the divine law forbidding 
theft — and of every other divine law, which, like it, 
is essentially moral in its nature, being founded on the 



21 

principles of natural and immutable moral obligation. 
It is readily admitted^, that no human power, whe- 
ther of the church or state, can originate or set aside 
a divine institution : whether, however, a weekly 
sabbath continues, under the christian dispensation, 
to he a divine institution, has hitherto been a 
matter of " doubtful disputation," on which it seems 
very unnatural to think, that civil governments 
ought to be called upon to deliver an opinion. Those 
persons who consider the observance of a sabbath 
to be still a divine obligation are no doubt bound, 
even if the notions they entertain be incorrect, to act 
on their own convictions of personal duty : but it 
seems to be extremely unwarrantable for such persons 
to obtrude their private views of religious obligation 
on the civil legislature ; and to insist, that " it in- 
volves a moral wrong" to decline the recognition of 
their theological dogma. 

It is very incorrect to represent the refusal of the 
civil power to recognize the obligation of this contro- 
verted doctrine, as a national crime — as setting the 
eternal laws of God at defiance. It is manifest that 
representations of this kind, however alarming they 
may prove to men of weak and timid minds, are alto- 
gether groundless and imaginary, being founded on 
the gross fallacy of taking for granted a principal point 
at issue in the religious controversy ; namely, that 
the law of the sabbath is a duty moral in its nature. 



22 

They who can acquiesce in the extraordinary dogma 
that one portion of time is more holy in its nature 
than another, are no doubt at perfect liberty to act 
on their own convictions of religious truth and duty : 
but it seems very unreasonable, that this apparently 
incredible notion should be forced upon others, whose 
minds, it may be, are too logically constructed to 
allow them to acquiesce in its accuracy ; and it seems 
to be especially unreasonable, that civil governments 
should be called upon to acknowledge its correctness 
and obligation, on the penalty of being denounced as 
vile Atheists, who presume to oppose the eternal 
moral laws of the Deity. 

The error of confounding people's own interpre- 
tation of the law of duty, with the law itself, and 
of condemning, on the ground of this private inter- 
pretation, every action of others, which is not sanc- 
tioned by it, constitutes the very essence of intoler- 
ance, and has long been the fruitful source of 
innumerable forms of unchristian usurpation and 
spiritual oppression. It is a gross fallacy to represent 
the law " Thou shalt not steal," and an injunction 
to sanctify a determinate portion of time, as laws 
alike eternal and immutable in their obligation. 
The former is a moral duty, being founded on the 
nature of things, and its obligation is recognized by 
the human conscience independent of any specific 
enactment. The latter is termed a positive law. 



23 

because it derives its obligation wholly from the 
promulgation of an express precept. The one is 
commanded because it is right, the other is right 
solely because it is commanded. 

This distinction between the positive character of 
the law of the sabbath, and the moral nature of all 
laws founded on the principles of the love of God 
and our neighbour, is one of the principal points on 
which the controversy regarding the perpetuity of the 
sabbatical law hinges : and existing as it does, in the 
nature of things, unless it be clearly apprehended 
and constantly kept in view, it is impossible that the 
relation in which the institution stands to human 
governments can be accurately understood. It is no 
doubt true, that no human authority can reverse the 
divine law prohibiting theft, neither can human au- 
thority reverse the law of the sabbath if it be actually 
in force now, as a law of heaven : but it does not 
follow from this, that " it involves a moral wrong," 
to set aside the observance of a weekly day of rest 
as a municipal regulation. It would undoubtedly 
involve a moral wrong to attempt to reverse any 
moral precept whatever : but this is a very different 
matter from civil governments declining to recognize 
the obligation of a religious ordinance not moral in 
its nature, and the very existence of which is the 
subject of an apparently interminable theological 
dispute. We cannot conceive it possible, in the na- 
ture of things, that a single duty of a moral kind 



24 

can be reversed by any authority human or divine ; 
it is incontrovertible, however, that the same au- 
thority which enacted a positive precept, is competent 
at any time to repeal it. It is obvious, that even as 
regards moral precepts, the civil legislature does not 
consider itself bound to adopt, or formally recognize, 
every duty of this nature — it adopts merely that 
portion of them, the enforcement of which is con- 
sidered conducive to furthering the great object of 
human government, namely, the general well-being 
of the community. The law " Thou shalt not steal," 
for instance, and other precepts of a similar nature, 
are adopted by every civilized nation, simply on 
account of their deciding equitably between man and 
man, and because their enforcement is found neces- 
sary to the general protection of life and property. 

All civil laws that have their foundation in the 
principles of immutable equity, exist both as laws of 
God and as laws of man : the obedience, however, 
which these laws respectively require, is very diflPerent 
in its nature and extent. The human law '^ Thou 
shalt not steal" being simply a restraint on individual 
aggression, consists in specific prohibitions, and so 
long as an external obedience is rendered to it, a person 
is exempted from the penalty annexed to its violation. 
In the judgment of the divine law, however, every 
one is a violator of its injunctions who cherishes the 
desire of defrauding his neighbour. The law of man 
is incompetent to take cognizance of men's secret 



25 

intentions, and proceeds on the evidence of overt acts : 
it presumes every one to be innocent until he be 
convicted of external disobedience. The law of God, 
on the other hand, proceeds on an infallible know- 
ledge of men's inward dispositions, and thus reaches 
to the thoughts and intents of the heart. Now, 
though a law enjoining a weekly day of rest differs 
in nature from the injunction which forbids the 
commission of theft, because, not being founded 
on the principles of natural equity, it is a law of a 
positive and not of a moral nature ; it is no doubt 
conceivable, that such a law may also exist, both as a 
law of God and as a law of man. The adoption of a 
regulation of this kind by the civil power, must how- 
ever, as has already been remarked, be wholly a 
matter of option and expediency. 

We conceive then that, as the law of the sabbath 
is a precept of a positive, and not of a moral nature, 
there can be no moral wrong involved, in a national 
legislature declining to recognize its existence and 
obligation. The only obligation that can attach to 
civil governments, to adopt the regulation of a peri- 
odical intermission of public business, must arise 
from the adaptation of the regulation to the general 
convenience and interests of the community. The 
judgment of the legislature upon these points, ap- 
pears to be the only tenable footing, on which a 
municipal law of this nature can ever consistently 
be placed. 



26 

It is deserving of remark, that the observance of 
Sunday in this country, seems to have been viewed 
by the early English Reformers as being simply an 
expedient regulation. " We observe the Sundays/' 
says Cranmer, in his Catechism published in 1588, 
^"^and certain other days, as the magistrates do judge 
convenient, whom in this thing we ought to obey." 
Tindal was of opinion that it devolved on christians 
themselves, ^^ to appoint every seventh or every tenth 
day to be a day of rest, as they found most conve- 
nient." At the period of the Reformation, this viev/ 
of the subject seems generally to have prevailed. 
Calvin, it is well known, entertained these sentiments, 
and proposed at one time to transfer the observance 
from Sunday to Thursday, assigning as his reason for 
wishing to make the change, that it would be a pro- 
per instance of christian liberty. 

That the original law of the sabbath is " essentially 
a national ordinance," and that " it requires the con- 
currence of the civil power to secure its proper obser- 
vance," appear to be propositions indubitably correct. 
To all, however, who understand the nature of Christ's 
kingdom as distinguished from the kingdom of Israel, 
(in which its spiritual character and blessings w^ere, 
through earthly figures, adumbrated,) as well as from 
all the governments of this world, this very circum- 
stance of the institution being essentially political in 
its nature, must appear to furnish a very powerful 
'presumptive evidence in disproof of its perpetuity 



27 

under the christian dispensation. The law of the 
sabbath was delivered to the Hebrew nation^ as " a 
kingdom of priests/' placed under a theocratic go- 
vernment, and separated to God's exclusive service ; 
the observance of the letter of the law — of its mi- 
nutest prescriptions, was enforced by the same fearful 
sanctions which were annexed to the crimes of blas- 
phemy and idolatry. 

Though there have been various systems of civil 
and ecclesiastical government devised by men, in 
imitation of this peculiar system of religious worship 
and civil polity, instituted by Jehovah himself, these 
various systems have been all bad imitations of an 
original that was never designed to serve as a model 
for civil governments to copy. It may comport 
with the nature and policy of human governm.ents, 
founded on this erroneous principle, to incorporate 
the positive ordinances of revealed religion, with their 
secular enactments, and to legislate on religious mat- 
ters for the general community : but all systems of 
this kind are disowned alike by the old covenant of 
Moses, and by the new covenant, which has been 
ratified by the death of the Messiah. Christ's king- 
dom, it is ever to be remembered, '' is not of this 
world," and its laws are designed for those persons 
only who are its real and spiritual subjects. 

To all by whom these important truths are accu- 
rately conceived of, and followed into all their natural 
and necessary consequences, it must appear to be 



28 

very improbable^ that any religious ordinance should 
have been appointed under the christian dispensation, 
which requires the concurrence of the civil power to 
render it practicable. It is obvious, however, that if 
the law of the sabbath continues binding on Christ's 
disciples, they are necessarily dependent on the con- 
currence of the governments of this world, for the 
due performance of a religious duty of indispensable 
obligation. ^' The institution of the weekly sabbath," 
says Paley, ^^ is so connected with the functions of 
civil life, and requires so much the concurrence of 
the civil law in its regulation and support, that it can- 
not perhaps be made the ordinance of any rehgion, 
till that religion be made the religion of the state." 
Now as it was not intended that the religion of 
Christ should, at any time, be made the religion of the 
state, it is manifest that though the observance of the 
sabbath was perfectly practicable by the inhabitants 
of Judea, for whom it was originally designed, its 
strict observance must always have been very in- 
compatible with the varied circumstances of Christ's 
disciples, chosen out of the nations of the earth, 
and scattered over the whole world. 

It is not proposed to adduce at present, conside- 
rations of this kind, as furnishing any conclusive 
evidence in disproof of the existence of the sabbatical 
law, under the christian economy ; when it is advan- 
ced, however, by those who themselves profess to be 
opposed to state religions, that the institution '^is 



29 

essentially a national ordinance/' with a view of shew- 
ing that civil governments are bound to recognize its 
obligation, we may be allowed to suggest, that in this 
view, its observance can be generally practicable in 
those countries only, where systems of national Chris- 
tianity have been established — systems all fundamen- 
tally at variance with the spiritual character of the 
christian religion. 

It is possible to conceive, indeed, that the law of 
the sabbath may retain its obligation under the 
christian dispensation, independent of the concurrence 
of the civil power : for the disciples of Christ have 
been taught to expect opposition and various difficul- 
ties in following the path of commanded duty. There 
is no evidence, however, that the harassing inconve- 
nience and serious sacrifice of worldly property which 
inevitably would have been incurred, by the perfor- 
mance of this duty, in every country where Sunday 
was not observed as a day of public rest, have been 
constituted a part of that cross which christians are 
called upon to bear. Those persons who hold the 
doctrine of the perpetuity of the sabbatical law, 
ought, undoubtedly, to be very thankful when they 
are placed in circumstances, where the duty implied 
in this doctrine can be performed without personal 
loss or inconvenience. It is certain, that none of the 
followers of Christ possessed the same opportunities 
during the three first centuries of the christian era : 
so that if the existing law of the land upon the sub- 



80 

ject were now to be repealed^ (an event greatly 
to be deprecated/) the observers of a weekly sabbath 
would not be placed under more trying circumstan- 
ces than were those of all the disciples of Christ, in 
every part of the world, anterior to the period when 
Constantine established the observance of sunday as 
a weekly religious festival throughout the Roman 
Empire. The opportunity which the law of the 
country at present affords for the observance of a 
weekly sabbath, does not, however, change the nature 
of the political regulation — a regulation founded, as 
has been shewn, on considerations of expediency : and 
it is obvious, on the other hand, that if this privilege 
were now withdrawn, the obligation to observe this 
day as a law of heaven, supposing such a law to be 
in force, would continue unimpaired. 

It is very desirable that the religious question of 
the existing obligation of the sabbath, should be ex- 
amined without reference to any civil enactments 
whatever. Owing to the incorporation of the sab- 
batical law with the common law of the country, there 
exists in various quarters much confusion of thought 
regarding the real grounds of its religious obligation, 
and, in conjunction with this, a natural prejudice in 
favour both of the existing regulation of a weekly 
cessation of public labour, and of the rehgious opi- 
nion with which it is usually associated. In all our 
investigations of scriptural evidence, our conclu- 

" See Appendix. 



31 

sions are apt to be materially influenced by the 
state of mind we bring to the inquiry. In questions 
like this especially, of an apparently mixed nature, 
when the mind is pre-occupied with a strong feeling 
in favour of a municipal regulation of manifest expe- 
diency, it is very natural to transfer this feeling to a 
particular scriptural conclusion : at all events, there 
is less chance than usual of the evidence relative to 
the question being examined with that dispassionate 
impartiality which it is so desirable to carry into all 
our investigations of moral and religious subjects. 
In no case, indeed, is it possible to ascertain the 
actual extent to which the natural prejudice arising 
from our preconceived opinions, is allowed to influence 
our judgment in the examination of all collateral 
questions. This much is abundantly clear, that 
while the bulk of professing christians acknowledge 
the scriptures to be the only rule of their faith and 
practice, it is usual for them to consult this authority, 
more with a design to discover evidence in support 
of the opinions they have already adopted, than with 
the real desire of ascertaining what truths have actu- 
ally been revealed, and what opinions they ought 
consequently to adopt. 

If we wish to examine the Sabbatarian question, as a 
matter of religious obligation, which is unquestiona- 
bly the most important light in which it can be 
regarded, it is to be kept in mind, that the inquiry 
is not at all about the expediency of any existing 



32 

regulation of society, but concerning the perpetuity 
of the sabbatical institution under the christian 
economy. The question is not^ Is the established re- 
gulation of observing a weekly day of rest expedient 
as a law of man ? The sole question with which we 
are concerned is this. Is it true that the law of the 
sabbath is now in force as a law of heaven ? This 
question, it is manifest, can be satisfactorily answered 
only by the production of legitimate scriptural 
evidence. 

The agitation of this question, we are aware, has 
frequently been deprecated, on the ground that it 
would be dangerous to the interests of christian piety 
to unsettle the public mind upon the subject: all 
apprehensions of this kind, however, we regard to be 
wholly imaginary and groundless. To apprehend any 
danger to the cause of true Christianity, from tempe- 
rate and fair discussion, seems to indicate suspicions 
unworthy of a religion that rests upon the basis of 
satisfactory evidence and conclusive argument. The 
disciples of Christ have been enjoined " to prove all 
things, and to hold fast that which is good;" and 
whatever reasons the adherents of religious systems 
that are indebted for their support to the prevalence 
of popular ignorance and credulity, may have, for 
deprecating discussion, the cause of true religion 
cannot possibly sustain any permanent injury from an 
unsparing examination of all its doctrines, or from 
the elucidation and establishment of scriptural 



33 

truth. It is high time that all the professors of the 
christian name should abandon every appearance of 
collusion with pious frauds, 

Christianity has suffered sufficiently from this 
quarter^ in past ages, and it now courts unfettered 
discussion, and the most scrutinizing inquiry into 
all its merits and pretensions. It appeals from every 
mistaken judgment which men have passed on its 
claims, from their having viewed its character 
through the medium of worldly appearances, and 
the injudicious representations of its professed advo- 
cates, to its legitimate evidence and real pretensions, 
as contained in the scriptures of truth. The greatest 
good that can be wished for the religion of Christ, 
is, that men would take it into their own hands, and 
examine its character, and the intelligence it commu- 
nicates, as matters in which they are personally, 
deeply interested. The cause of true Christianity is 
satisfied to stand on its own merits, and disowns all 
connivance with the false and hollow support of 
traditional superstitions and worldly appendages of 
men's devising. 



SECTION II. 

ON THE SUPPOSED TRANSFERENCE OF THE WEEKLY 
SABBATH FROM THE JEWISH TO THE CHRISTIAN ECO- 
NOMY, AT THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GOSPEL. 

The principal point relative to the divine institution 
of a weekly sabbath, which it is of practical impor- 
tance to ascertain, is comprised in two leading 
questions : — 

First. — Whether the law was delivered to the 
Jewish people alone, and was designed to terminate 
at the dissolution of the Hebrew commonwealth : or — 

Secondly. — Whether at the introduction of the 
Gospel it was transferred to the disciples of Christ. 

Amongst modern writers on both sides of this 
question, the opinion seems to have prevailed, that 
in order to ascertain the existing obligation of the 
sabbatical law, it was necessary, first of all, to ascer- 
tain the period at which the divine command was 
originally given. This opinion has led them accord- 
ingly to represent the inquiry relative to the period 
at which the law was first promulgated, as com- 
prising the main point on which the controversy 
hinges. 



36 

It has been supposed, that if the divine command 
was actually delivered at the creation, it continues, 
unless repealed by some subsequent revelation, to be 
binding upon all men, in every age of the world : — 
that if, on the other hand the law was first promul- 
gated to the Jewish nation in the wilderness, as it 
must then have been directed to the Jewish people 
alone, something further, either in the subject or 
circumstances of the command will be necessary, to 
prove that it now retains its obligation under the 
christian economy. 

Those who hold the former opinion, interpret the 
passage in the second chapter of Genesis, in which 
the mention of the sabbath first occurs, as recording 
the original promulgation of the law ; and suppose 
that, as the observance of the sabbath was thus ap- 
pointed at the creation, it must have been designed 
to be binding on the head of the human family, and 
on all his descendants. 

On the opposite side, it has been maintained, that 
it is not said in the passage in Genesis referred to, 
that God sanctified the seventh day at that time : 
that the sacred historian mentions merely the reaso?i 
why the seventh day was hallowed : namely, because 
on it, God rested '' from all his work which he crea- 
ted and made." Those who have adopted this view 
of the passage, conceive that, although at first sight, 
it may seem improbable that the sanctification of the 
seventh day should have been mentioned if it had 



37 

not then been appointed, it is to be borne in mind 
that Moses was not writing for the instruction and 
obedience of Adam and the patriarchs, but for the 
Jewish nation, to whom, as they had received a com- 
mand to keep holy a weekly sabbath, it was natural, 
in recording the creation in six days, to mention 
that this was one of the events which their observance 
of a weekly sabbath was designed to commemorate. 
There seems to have been, on both sides, a greater 
importance attached to this part of the question 
than necessarily, or even properly, belongs to it. The 
period at which the sabbatical law was first promul- 
gated, is a matter of fact, which, with all -'Other 
matters of fact, can be ascertained only by compe- 
tent testimony : as there exists no direct precept or 
undoubted example from which it can be inferred, 
that the law was in force, anterior to its promul- 
gation to the Jewish nation, the opinion that it was 
observed during the patriarchal ages, must necessa- 
rily be regarded as a mere conjecture which admits 
of no satisfactory proof. It seems at all events, 
therefore, to be very rash and unjustifiable to deduce 
from a supposed command given to Adam, the im- 
portant conclusion, that the law is addressed to the 
human species alike, and retains its obligation during 
every period of time : and it seems also to be ex- 
tremely rash to found on an assumption of this 
nature a general theory ; and then to proceed to 
make every subsequent part of the scriptural account 



38 

of sabbatical institutions, quadrate with this precon- 
ceived opinion. 

Instead of beginning at this part of the question, or 
of forming any positive opinion about a matter of fact, 
v\^hich, as it has not been recorded, cannot now be 
satisfactorily ascertained, it seems to be a far safer 
and more satisfactory course, to begin at the scrip- 
tural evidence, which exists concerning the relation 
in which the sabbath stands to the christian dispen- 
sation ; and endeavour, in this way, first of all, cor- 
rectly to ascertain the view of the institution that 
was entertained by the apostles of Christ, when they 
set up " the kingdom of heaven" in the world. It is 
not matter of conjecture or uncertainty that the 
seventh day was sanctified throughout Judea in 
obedience to the prescriptions of the fourth com- 
mandment, at the period of the introduction of the 
Gospel : if then we can ascertain from the New Tes- 
tament writings, whether or not this commandment 
was transferred to Christ's disciples, we are more 
likely to learn correctly the mind and will of God upon 
the matter, by acquiescing at once in authoritative 
evidence of this kind, than by indulging in specula- 
tions and conjectures about the unrecorded religious 
practices of the antediluvian and patriarchal ages of 
the world. It is no doubt recorded, that God rested 
from his works on the seventh day, but it is to be 
remembered, that it is the precepts and not the ex- 
ample of God which constitute the rule of human 



39 

duty. It is certainly quite conceivable also, that 
some sabbatical institution may have been observed 
anterior to the time of Moses ; but though this were 
much more probable than it is_, it does not seem ne- 
cessarily to follow, that the religious practices of that 
early dispensation of religion, constitute any autho- 
ritative precedent binding upon the subjects of the 
kingdom of heaven. It is not the uncertain practi- 
ces of the patriarchs, but the things vdiich Christ has 
commanded, which Christians have been enjoined to 
observe. 

It appears, indeed^ to be perfectly preposterous to 
seek for information regarding the rule of christian 
obedience, in the scanty records that have been 
transmitted to us of the religious practices of the first 
ages of the world. God, who at sundry times and in 
divers manners spake of old unto the fathers by the 
prophets, hath spoken in these latter days by his Son, 
whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom 
also he made the world. It is His voice which men 
are now called upon to hearken to, and to obey. 
The former word of prophecy has now received its 
verification and fulfilment in the advent and work of 
the Messiah ; and we are informed by the apostle 
Peter, that the writings of these Old Testament 
prophets, many of which w^ere designedly obscure 
and incomplete, are not to be interpreted alone, nor 
by mere human ingenuity and conjecture, but only 
as explained and confirmed by the clear and 



40 

completed revelation of Christ and his apostles. 
Christ is now declared to be '' the head of all govern- 
ment and power" : the disciples of Christ are not 
placed under the authority of Moses, nor under the 
authority of any human lawgiver, in any matter of 
religious obedience : one is their master even the 
Messiah, and his authority alone they are commanded 
to regard. 

It must be laid down then as the leading principle, 
on which all correct views of the nature and extent 
of christian obligation have their foundation, that 
the revealed will of Christ is the sole authoritative 
rule of christian duty. It is superfluous to state, that 
this vsdll embraces the eternal rule of morality, com- 
prehended in the principles of the love of God and 
our neighbour : to ascertain, however, what religious 
institutions or duties of a positive nature, are ob- 
ligatory under the christian economy, it is necessary 
to consult the New Testament writings, which furnish 
the only authentic record of the commandments of 
Christ, and of the obedience rendered to them by 
those who acted under the authoritative direction 
of Christ's apostles. By passing over, then, every 
preconceived theory, as well as all the different 
systems of religious discipline which the various 
denominations of the professedly christian world have 
adopted, and by placing ourselves in the situation of 
the first christians, who acted under the direction of 
the apostles, when they established the kingdom of 



41 

heaven in the worlds we are most likely to obtain an 
accurate view of that evidence relative to the existing 
obligation of the sabbath, which alone is to be re- 
garded as decisive upon the subject. 

It is to be remembered, that the kingdom of heaven 
was not established in the world, until Christ had 
finished the work that had been assigned to him : and 
it is evident, that previous to that period, the apos- 
tles themselves entertained many very mistaken con- 
ceptions regarding his true character, as well as the 
nature and object of his mission. Though a conside- 
rable portion of the personal instructions of Jesus, in 
his intercourse with his disciples, respected these im- 
portant subjects, their true meaning " was hid from 
them, and they comprehended it not, till after 
that Christ was risen from the dead." "I have yet" 
said he, ^' many things to say unto you, but ye can- 
not bear them now. Howbeit, when He the spirit of 
truth is come. He shall guide you into all truth.'"^ 
The gospel of the kingdom announced by Jesus 
during his ministry among men, was only, that the 
kingdom of heaven zvas at hand, and it was not until 
this kingdom was actually established by his death 
and resurrection, that the good news were really pub- 
lished of Jesus being the promised and true Messiah, 
the Son of the living God. Then it first was, that 
the glad tidings of pardon and peace through Him, 

^ John xvi. 12. 



42 

were freely and fully proclaimed to every creature 
under heaven. 

We are informed^ that after Jesus had risen from 
the dead, and had convinced his disciples of his re- 
surrection, he communicated to them various in- 
structions, regarding the nature of his kingdom, and 
regarding its promotion and establishment in the 
world. When about to ascend to the throne of this 
kingdom. He, in the exercise of that power over all 
things in heaven and on earth that had been given 
him, delivered to his apostles this commission — "Go 
ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the 
name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatso- 
ever I have commanded you : and lo ! I am with you 
alway, even unto the end of the world." In the exe- 
cution of this charge, the apostles went forth pro- 
claiming the facts of the death and resurrection of 
Jesus, making known the extent of his power as the 
risen Saviour, and publishing to all men, the free 
forgiveness of sin through his name. 

It is to be observed, that this commission was 
primarily addressed to the apostles, who all pos- 
sessed peculiar qualifications for its execution ; and 
who all, too, as the authoritative ambassadors of 
Christ, carried about with them, in the power of 
working miracles, the credentials of their divine em- 
bassy. These apostles had all " seen the Lord," and 
were thus competent, as eye and ear witnesses of the 



43 

facts they made known^ to testify thera satisfactorily to 
the world. They were also divinely qualified for their 
office, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, who " taught 
them all things/' bringing all things to their remem- 
brance '^whatsoever Christ had said unto them." 
Being '^ guided into all truth/' and "showed things 
to come/' the apostles were thus divinely constituted, 
authoritative teachers of Christianity, and in this capa- 
city, they have had no successors. They were inspired 
to interpret infallibly the meaning of the Old Testa- 
ment writings, and were also authorized and qualified 
to instruct all those whom they made disciples, 
in the knowledge of every doctrine, and in the ob- 
servance of every duty pertaining to the kingdom of 
heaven. 

It is to the apostles of Christ then, that christians 
have now to look for a satisfactory knowledge of the 
nature and extent of the obedience required of them. 
The will of God is the sole rule of christian duty ; 
and what that will is, we learn from these authoritative 
ambassadors of the kingdom of heaven. The testi- 
mony which they have committed to writing, is the 
same as that of Christ himself; so that his impres- 
sive declaration, when on earth, remains still in force. 
''He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that 
despiseth you, despiseth me : and he that despis- 
eth me, despiseth him that sent me."^ All those 

" Luke X. 16. 



44 

who are ^' of the truth/' and ''who have an ear to hear 
Christ's voice/'^ are represented in the scriptures as 
giving a peculiar attention to every thing that He 
or his apostles have said. In every instance in which 
the human mind is impressed with the divine evidence 
of the gospel of salvation, there is awakened a new 
sense of obligation and allegiance to Christ, which is 
manifested by an unhesitating compliance with every 
known duty. Jesus himself has expressly declared, 
that they only are his disciples who do the things 
which he has commanded : and that this disposition 
is the great and sole unerring test of all genuine 
christian affection. '' If any man love me, he will 
keep my words :" ''he that loveth me not, keepeth 
not my sayings."^ 

It must plainly be the duty therefore, of every 
one who professes allegiance to Christ, to regard su- 
premely his authority in all matters of faith and 
practice ; to believe whatever his apostles have 
revealed, and to practise whatever they have enjoined. 
Whatever Christ or his apostles taught, or whatever 
the first christians practised under their authoritative 
direction, constitutes an obligation on christians 
in every succeeding age. The New Testament 
writings thus form a perpetual rule of directory 
for the personal obedience and social practices of 
Christ's followers, sufficient for all the practical 

'John xxiii. 27. « John xiv, 23,24. 



45 

purposes of the christian life ; and this rule alone, we 
conceive, every private christian, and every single 
society of christians, ought stedfastly to follow. 

It is by this decisive test that we now purpose 
briefly to examine the modern doctrine of a christian 
sabbath ; and it will at once be perceived, that the 
sole question with which we are concerned, is this ; — 
Was the doctrine that '' ever since the resurrection 
of Christ, God has appointed the first day of the 
week to continue to the end of the world to be the 
christian sabbath,"^ a doctrine recognized or taught 
by Christ's apostles? 

That the view which the apostles took of the sab- 
batical institution, when setting up the kingdom of 
God in the world, was in accordance vnth the wdll 
of heaven, is not for a moment to be questioned. It is 
to be remembered, that at the period of the first pub- 
lication of the gospel, immediately subsequent to 
Christ's resurrection, the seventh day of the week 
was observed throughout Judea in obedience to the 
fourth commandment. Whether then, was this sab- 
batical observance viewed by the apostle as an inte- 
gral part of the Jewish constitution, and as standing 
or falling mth the other ordinances of the Mosaic 
economy : or, as a divine institution, which was de- 
signed to retain its obligation under the gospel dis- 
pensation ? These are, evidently, the points on 

^ Westminster Assembly's Catechism. 



46 

which it is the most requisite that we should arrive 
at a correct and satisfactory decision in the inquiry 
which it has been proposed to institute. 

There were two different lines of conduct, either of 
which it is conceivable the apostles may have pursued 
in reference to this matter. They may have taught 
the christian converts, that the weekly sabbath was a 
national observance, which the Jewish believers of 
the gospel were bound, as members of the Hebrew 
commonwealth, to obey; though all christians as 
such, and consequently, all those christian converts 
who had not formerly been Jews, were exempted 
from its obligation : or, they may have taught them 
the modern doctrine, that the duties prescribed in 
the fourth commandment, were transferred to the 
first day of the week, and with this alteration were to 
retain their obligation on the followers of Christ until 
the end of the world. It is certain that it must have 
been well known to the early believers of the gospel 
which of these courses the apostles were instructed 
to adopt. Those of them especially, who had not 
previously kept a sabbath at all, must have positively 
known, whether or not such an observance formed a 
part of " the things which Christ had commanded." 
It is manifest indeed, that a religious practice like 
this, which interferes so much with the usual arrange- 
ments and avocations of life, must, if enjoined on the 
Gentile converts, have been well known not only to 
them, but to all around them who took any notice of 



47 

their religious obedience. On the supposition there- 
fore, that the first day of the week was at that time 
observed as a holy sabbath, we should naturally ex- 
pect to find some indications of its regular recurrence; 
if no trace whatever of such an observance is to be 
found, we may be led eventually to conclude, that the 
sanctification of the first day of the week in obedience 
to the fourth commandment, forms no part of that 
revealed will of God, which constitutes the sole rule of 
christian obedience. 

The question of the existing obligation of the law 
of the sabbath, thus resolves itself into a simple matter 
of fact, which can be ascertained only by legitimate 
testimony. If we can ascertain from any recorded 
precept or example, that at the introduction of the 
gospel, the sabbath which previously had been kept 
by the Jewish people, was transferred to the first 
day of the week, and made obligatory on Christ's 
disciples, it will plainly follow, that its observance on 
that day, continues to be obligatory in every succeed- 
ing age. If, on the other hand, the facts recorded in 
sacred history be found greatly at variance with the 
supposition that this transference took place : if it 
appear from indubitable evidence, that the seventh 
day sabbath continued to be observed throughout the 
whole of the apostolic age, not only by the uncon- 
verted Jews, but also by all the Jewish believers of 
the gospel ; and if there exists no evidence of any 
new sabbath having been substituted in the room of 



48 

the Judaical one^ it will seem natural to draw the 
inference, that the institution was viewed by the 
apostles as an integral part of the Mosaic economy — 
that handwriting of ordinances which was blotted out 
by Christ, and as destined to terminate at the politi- 
cal dissolution of the Hebrew commonwealth. 

It is certain that the New Testament contains no 
record of the appointment of any new sabbath in the 
room of the institution previously observed by the 
Jewish nation. We search in vain the history of the 
apostolic age, for any indication of such an observance; 
there is nothing whatever mentioned from which it 
can be inferred that the early christians had been in- 
structed to observe the first day of the week or any 
other day as more holy than another. The expres- 
sions ^^the sabbath," and "the sabbath day," are 
indeed of frequent occurrence, both in the histories 
of Christ's life and ministry, as well as in that of the 
propagation of the gospel, and the setting up of the 
kingdom of heaven, subsequent to his resurrection. 
It is obvious, that as respects the institutions of 
Christ's kingdom, there is little or no importance to 
be attached to these expressions of themselves ; for in 
every instance in which they occur, it is evident that 
they relate to the seventh day sabbath ; the observ- 
ance of which was prescribed to the Jewish nation in 
the fourth commandment. As furnishing however, an 
indirect, but very unequivocal testimony to the senti- 
ments which were current at the period, when the 



49 

New Testament books were written, the circum- 
stance, that at that time, these expressions were uni- 
formly used and understood to denote Saturday, 
seems to be deserving of very particular notice. 
From the frequent occurrence of these expressions, 
both in the gospels and in the book of Acts, it is 
natural to infer that the modern notion of the substi- 
tution, at the resurrection of Christ, of the first for 
seventh day of the week, as the appointed weekly 
sabbath was at that time little known, if indeed it 
was known at all. 

In reading the Gospels, and the Acts of the apostles, 
we are very apt, through the influence of an early asso- 
ciation of ideas, to connect the date of the publication 
of these books, with that of the leading events they 
record ; and in this way are led practically to forget 
that a period of about thirty years elapsed between 
the first preaching of the gospel by the apostles and 
the circulation of the New Testament writings. It 
is to be borne in mind, that a considerable number of 
the early christians, for whose use and benefit the 
New Testament w^as primarily composed, were, at 
the date of the publication of its different books, pro- 
fessors of the christian name of comparatively old 
standing : and at that period, consequently, must 
have been quite familiar with all the positive duties 
of Christ's kingdom. It seems natural to think there- 
fore, that if the first christians had been accustomed 
for thirty years to observe the first day of the week 

H 



50 

as a holy sabbath, and to consider that day as the 
appointed substitute for the Jewish sabbath, that 
the inspired writers, when referring to this latter 
superseded ordinance, would have considered it 
necessary to distinguish it, in some way, from the 
new one. 

The sacred historians however, it is to be observed, 
invariably make use of the expression ^^ the sabbath 
day," to denote the seventh day of the week, without 
any explanation, or any apparent apprehension 
whatever of being misunderstood. At the present 
time, when persons speak of any event as having oc- 
curred on the sabbath day, their meaning is always 
understood to be, that it took place on a Sunday : 
and it is natural to think, that if the doctrine which 
is current at present, had been taught by the apostles, 
that the prevalence of this doctrine would have led 
the inspired writers, in narrating events which had 
occurred on a Saturday, to make use of tliis or some 
other distinguishing designation ; or if they called it 
the sabbath, to explain that they meant the seventh 
day sabbath, and not the sabbath at that time univer- 
sally observed by the followers of Christ. 

As respects the Gentile converts especially, the 
circumstance referred to seems particularly difficult 
to reconcile with the supposition on which the 
modern doctrine is founded. If the christian sabbath, 
as it is now called, had, at that period, been univer- 
sally observed by this class of converts, the first day 



51 

of the week must have been the only day famiharly 
known among them by the appellation of sahhath : 
for they had never been in the practice of observ- 
ing any other. This new sabbath, however, is never, 
as has already been remarked, once referred to, and 
the inspired writers uniformly speak of Saturday, as 
the only sabbath day at that time known. 

It is deserving of notice, moreover, that in the Acts 
of the apostles, a book which is supposed to have 
been published in the sixty fifth year of the christian 
era, this use of the term, occurs in a narrative 
which relates solely to the disciples of Christ. ^' And 
on the sabbath we (christians) went out of the city by 
a river side, where prayer was wont to be made."' 

It is also related of Paul, " that as his manner was, 
he went in unto them, and three sabbath days rea- 
soned with them out of the scriptures. "J We read 
also, that at Corinth "he reasoned in the syna- 
gogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and 
the Greeks."^ It is to be kept in mind, that at Phi- 
lippi, at Thessalonica, and at Corinth, the places re- 
ferred to, there was no sabbath day publicly kept as 
in Judea : the observance of the seventh day sabbath 
was confined to the few Jews that were resident there. 
If, however, the christian converts living in these 
cities, had been in the practice of keeping Sunday as 
a holy sabbath, it is natural to think that among them 



Acts xvi. 13. J Acts xvii. 2. ■• Acts xviii. 3. 



52 

the use of the term sabbath, to denote any par- 
ticular day of the week, would have been under- 
stood as signifying Sunday, and not Saturday, the 
day which the new sabbath had supplanted. 

It is deserving of notice also, that in the gospels, 
the expressions " the sabbath" and "the sabbath day," 
not only occur in narratives of events that took place 
during the life of Jesus, but also in predictions of 
events that were not to occur until forty years sub- 
sequent to the setting up of Christ's kingdom : and 
this, without the slightest allusion to the supposed 
substitution of the Christian for the Jewish sabbath, 
which change, if it had been designed to take place 
must doubtless, at that advanced period, have been 
completely established. Christ, in foretelling the 
coming destruction of Jerusalem, gave this injunction 
to his disciples, " Pray ye that your flight be not in 
the winter, neither on the sabbath day."^ The 
sabbath day here referred to, must unquestionably 
have been the seventh day one ; for the persons to 
whom Christ gave this warning, could not, without 
some intimation of the change, have well understood 
his meaning if he had intended any other. It is not 
a little remarkable, however, that the celebrated 
president Edwards has adduced this passage as fur- 
nishing an " argument" that the sabbatical law was 
designed to be of perpetual obligation. This argu- 
ment he states as follows : — - 

' Matthew xxiv. 20, 



53 

** A further argument for the perpetuity of the 
" sabbath we have m Matthew xxiv. 20. ' Pray ye 
*' that your flight be not in the winter^ neither on the 
" sabbath day/ Christ is here speaking of the flight 
" of the apostles and other christians out of Jerusa- 
" lem and Judea, just before their final destruction/ as 
" is manifest by the whole context^ and especially by 
*' the 16th verse — ' Then let them which be in Judea 
'' flee into the mountains.' But this final destruc- 
" tion of Jerusalem, was after the dissolution of the 
*' Jewish constitution, and after the christian dispen- 
*^ sation was fully set up. Yet it is plainly implied 
^^ in these words of our Lord, that even then, christians 
" were bound to a strict observance of the sabbath."'" 

This writer appears confidently to have believed, 
that previous to the final destruction of Jerusalem, 
the christian sabbath was generally observed through- 
out Judea in the place of the Jewish ordinance, for 
on no other supposition is it conceivable, that the 
words of Christ can be construed as furnishing any 
evidence in support of the doctrine he was advocating. 
Now it is obvious, that this notion is at variance not 
only with the natural, unstrained meaning of Christ's 
injunction, but with the whole history of that event- 
ful period. That the seventh day sabbath continued, 
after the introduction of the gospel, to be strictly ob- 
served throughout Judea, by the Jewish nation as 

Sermons on the Perpetuity of the Sabbath. — Works. — Vol. vii. 509. 



54 

usual, is a fact attested by all history sacred and 
prophane. It is certainly not a little difficult to con- 
ceive, in what manner this circumstance can be 
understood as implying any proof of the trans- 
ference of the sabbatical law to the christian dispen- 
sation : for it seems very unequivocally to point at 
an opposite conclusion, namely, that the observance 
prescribed in the fourth commandment was interwo- 
ven with the Mosaic economy, and was not designed 
to terminate until the ultimate dissolution of the 
Jewish polity. That Jesus spoke of tliis national 
sabbath seems so obviously plain, as to admit neither 
of doubt nor dispute. 

The supposition that his words imply that christi- 
ans would, at that time, be bound to keep the chris- 
tian sabbath, is founded on an entire misconception 
of the events which then took place. That all the 
disciples of Christ, of Jewish extraction, resident in 
Judea, were under a civil obligation to comply with 
the prescriptions of the fourth commandment, and 
with all the other laws of Moses, until the dissolution 
of the Jewish government, is a fact attested by the 
most incontrovertible historical evidence. It seems 
to be clear beyond all reasonable doubt, there- 
fore, that in warning his disciples of the impending 
fate of the holy city, Christ spoke of this national 
sabbath ; and his words, it is obvious, imply no- 
thing more than what is in entire accordance with 
the ascertained facts of Jewish history ; namely, that 



55 

the strict observance of the weekly sabbath continued 
to be enforced as the national law of Judea, on both 
Jews and Christians, until the final overthrow of the 
government in the seventieth year of the christian 
era. 

The view taken of this very plain passage, by this 
celebrated writer, furnishes a striking illustration of 
the strong and injurious influence which preconceived 
notions sometimes exert over the most powerful 
minds, in the interpretation of scriptural evidence. 
In New England, it is w^ell known, the doctrine of a 
christian sabbath was, in president Edwards' time, 
universally recognized, and its observance zealously 
and strictly enjoined, according to the threats and 
promises contained in the Old Testament. From 
being habituated to witness a general recogni- 
tion of this sabbatical obligation, he seems hastily, 
and probably without much consideration, to have 
assumed, that the same obligation must have been 
recognized and acted on by the early christians during 
the time of the apostles, and that the observance of 
the new sabbath accordingly, must have been com- 
pletely established long previous to the final destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem. 

The habit of viewing the apostolic age of Christian- 
ity entirely through the medium of the religious 
regulations and appearances which now exist, and 
with which our minds have become familiar, is a 
common and natural source of innumerable errors 



be 

and misconceptions. Closely connected with this mis- 
take, there is another, which, though less palpable, 
is probably, among a certain class of men, not less 
prevalent, and which certainly is not less deceptive 
in its influence : we refer to the common practice of 
teaching people Christianity through the medium of 
human systems of divinity, and to the common 
result, of their being led by this means, to in- 
terpret every part of the sacred writings in ac- 
cordance with a preconceived theory. When men's 
minds are preoccupied with the outlines of systems 
of this kind, they are very apt to overlook or 
practically to forget the gradual development of 
divine truth, the almost imperceptible beginning 
of the kingdom of Christ, and the very slow progress 
which it actually made in the world. By being ac- 
customed too to view every period of sacred history 
through the medium of the compact systems of scho- 
lastic theologians, and the religious observances that 
are now established in the world, they are naturally 
led to suppose, that Christianity presented in the 
apostolic age, an appearance very similar to that which 
it assumes at the present time. After, indeed, the in- 
fluence of all these, and other natural causes of 
scriptural misconception, are taken into account, it 
must be allowed to be a very singular circumstance, 
that an acute writer like president Edwards, should 
have fallen into the palpable error of maintaining 
" that the dissolution of the Jewish constitution was 



57 

previous to the final destruction of Jerusalem :" or 
should ever have imagined, that anterior to that 
event, "the christian dispensation was fully set up ;" 
so as to warrant the conclusion, that the christian 
sabbath had, at that time, assumed the place of the 
Jewish ordinance. 

It is obvious that any small degree of plausibility 
which this argument possesses, is derived wholly 
from the fallacy of confounding the scriptural doctrine 
of the abrogation of the Mosaic law by the death of 
Christ, with the subsequent actual dissolution of 
the Jewish polity. It is very true, that the Mo- 
saic economy received its accomplishment in the 
advent and work of the Messiah, and that "the 
christian dispensation was fully set up" previous to 
the final destruction of Jerusalem. That Christ ful- 
filled the law, and became the end of it for justification 
to every one who believed on him, is a leading truth 
inculcated in every part of the apostolic writings. It 
is not to be forgotten, however, that though those 
Jews who believed in Jesus as the promised Messiah, 
were as the subjects of " the new covenant," no longer 
"under the law but under grace;" as members of 
the Jewish commonwealth, they continued until its 
dissolution, under a civil obligation to comply with 
all the municipal laws and religious observances which 
the law of Moses prescribed. It is matter of history 
indeed, that the public religion established in Judea, 
was, in outward appearance, almost wholly unaffected 



58 

by the introduction of the gospel : the observance of 
the sabbath in obedience to the fourth commandment, 
and the observance of all the various rites and cere- 
monies prescribed in the law, continued to be en- 
forced on the whole population, by the same severe 
penalties with which that religious economy had, in 
every period of its former existence, been sanctioned. 
Though it is quite true therefore, that the christian 
dispensation was fully set up previous to the final 
destruction of Jerusalem, it is a great mistake to 
suppose that this spiritual establishment of Chris- 
tianity in the world, was synchronous with the politi- 
cal dissolution of the Mosaic law. The kingdom of 
heaven was set up by the apostles immediately on 
receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit : and it came 
upon men without observation ; for its doctrines and 
institutions interfered in no degree with the public 
religion established in Judea, or with any of the po- 
litical or social institutions of the kingdoms of this 
world. The law of the sabbath, as well as the other 
national laws and religious rites of the Jewish go- 
vernment, continued in full force until the final 
destruction of the holy city by the Roman army. 

When the history of the apostolic age of Chris- 
tianity is examined with any moderate degree of 
attention, it must appear very unaccountable, that 
the mistake of supposing " that the Jewish constitu- 
tion was dissolved at the death of Christ, and that the 
christian dispensation was immediately substituted in 



59 

its place/* should ever have obtained any prevalence 
in the world. There is reason to believe, however, 
that though little suspected, there have been few 
mistakes more current, or more fertile in the produc- 
tion of scriptural misconception and error. Accus- 
tomed indeed, as we are, to look upon the christian 
dispensation, as the divinely appointed successor of 
the Mosaic economy, it requires a considerable effort 
of the imagination to cast off the influence of this 
and other similar popular errors, and to conceive ac- 
curately of the actual state of public religion in 
Judea at the period of the first introduction of the 
gospel. Through being habituated to view the his- 
tory of that period in constant connexion with the 
knowledge we now possess, of the immense conse- 
quences that hung upon the events which then took 
place, we are liable greatly to misapprehend the light 
in which these events were actually regarded by those 
who witnessed them. The occurrences which at that 
time really attracted the greatest share of public 
attention, have now probably passed into oblivion, or 
at least are, in a great measure, lost sight of and for- 
gotten ; while the few unobtrusive facts recorded in 
sacred history, appear, in our view, so important in 
themselves, as well as in their consequences to poste- 
rity, that it is naturally supposed they must have 
agitated the whole framework of society, and pro- 
duced, almost instantaneously, a revolution in the 



60 

state of public opinion, as well as an entire change 
in the religious institutions of the country. 

It is to be remembered, that during the few years 
of Christ's public ministry, his claims to the Messiah- 
ship, though attested by the most incontrovertible di- 
vine evidence, were either secretly contemned or open- 
ly opposed by all the leading public men of the time : 
and there is reason to believe, that in the general 
estimation of the Jewish public, the ignominious 
termination of his life was held to be a merited re- 
tribution for the capital crime with which he stood 
chargeable before the judicial tribunals of his country. 
There can be little doubt, indeed, that the religious 
pretensions of Jesus, must, in the judgment of all 
superficial onlookers, have appeared to be entirely 
confuted and overthrown by his ultimate arrest and 
public execution ; and though ze^e now know that 
God decided the controversy that had long been 
carried on between Him and his enemies the Jewish 
rulers, by raising him from the dead, thus reversing 
the sentence passed upon him, and attesting the vali- 
dity of his claim to the Messiahship, we are not to 
suppose that this interpretation of these events was at 
that time generally recognized, or, indeed, that it 
was by any one clearly understood. We know that 
his own disciples forsook him at the mournful hour 
of exposure to public ignominy, and instead of 
rejoicing that the work of redemption was about to 
be completed, gave utterance to their disappointed 



61 

expectations, and desponding thoughts, in expres- 
sions like the following : — '' We trusted that it had 
been he, which should have redeemed Israel"" — lan- 
guage plainly indicative of their entire ignorance of 
the leading design of Christ's advent, as also of the 
nature of that kingdom which he was about to esta- 
blish in the world. The great facts of the gospel, 
indeed, the death and resurrection of Christ, impor- 
tant though they now appear to us, who have been 
taught by the apostles to apprehend their true mean- 
ing, attracted at that time, it is probable, a compara- 
tively small degree of the public notice : and even after 
these facts had been proclaimed and testified by the 
apostles, and after the kingdom of Christ had been 
fully set up in the world, it is probable, that to a 
considerable portion of the inhabitants of Judea, the 
very existence of this kingdom was not known ; at all 
events, it is certain that it was only by a mere frac- 
tion of the population," that it was actually recog- 

° Luke xxiv. 21. 

° There were, no doubt a great many thousands of the Jewish people converted 
to Christ in the days of the apostles ; but there are good grounds for believing 
that what is stated above, is materially correct. The population of Judea at 
Christ's Advent, appears, by all accounts, to have been very considerable. In 
the last Jewish war, and in the subsequent rebellions, millions were slain, and 
thousands fell by the hands of the executioner. Even after all this depopulation 
had taken place, the number of the Jewish people subsequent to the taking of 
Jerusalem, has by some writers been computed as amounting to " sixty six 
millions, two hundred and forty thousand." This estimate is surely greatly too 
high : it cannot be doubted however, that Judea contained at that period, a 
population of a great many millions. 

See Jahn's Hebrew Commonwealth, Vol. II. p. 211. 



62 

nized as the promised kingdom of God. Even those 
who did recognize this kingdom, namely, the apostles 
and Jewish converts, continued to frequent the tem- 
ple, and to conform to all the ceremonials of the 
Mosaic law as usual. This they did, not as christians, 
but as Jewish citizens, who were under a civil obliga- 
tion to comply with all the civil and religious laws 
established in the country. In this way it is evident 
the kingdom of heaven would literally come upon 
men without observation. As christians the Jewish 
converts assembled for religious purposes daily, in 
each other's private houses, (kat oikonP) without 
exciting probably any particular notice. In public 
profession, in fact, these individuals continued to be 
Jews, even after their conversion to the faith of the 
gospel : that is, they continued to conform to all the 
religious rites and ceremonies prescribed in the law 
of Moses. 

Thus, as regarded outward appearances, the king- 
dom of Christ was set up in the world without excit- 
ing much general observation, and without interfering 
in any degree with the political institutions of the 
kingdoms of this world. The affairs of the Jewish 
nation continued after its establishment to be carried 
on with the same order and regularity with which 
they had been conducted previous to its introduc- 
tion : there was no change of dynasty, "^ or political 

^ Acts ii. 46. evidently opposed to en to iero. 

■5 Judea, it is well known, was at this time tributary to the Romans, and had 
been so ever since its conquest by Pompey. Pontius Pilate was procurator from 
A. D. 26 to 38. 



63 

movement of any kind calculated to agitate the pub- 
lic mind : the law of Moses continued to be recog- 
nized as the sole rule of public religious worship and 
civil government : the daily sacrifices, and all the 
various services of the Temple, continued to be cele- 
brated with the wonted scrupulous care and solemnity; 
and the observance of the seventh day as a holy 
sabbath, continued to be enforced on the whole popu- 
lation of Judea, by the same solemn sanctions which 
had been annexed to the violation of the prescrip- 
tions of the law, at its original promulgation. 

It has apparently been in the entire forgetfulness 
of these obvious facts, that the notion has been 
adopted, that at the introduction of Christianity, the 
christian sabbath and sacraments, (as they are called) 
were substituted for certain ordinances, supposed to 
have been synonymous with them in use and signi- 
fication, under the former dispensation. Opposed as 
this opinion is to the whole tenor of sacred history, it 
has, in various quarters, been entertained with an 
undoubting confidence, as if it were a first principle 
which admitted of no dispute. It has been supposed 
that the ordinance of the Lord's supper was appointed 
in the room of the Jewish Passover, and the ordi- 
nance of christian baptism in that of the rite of circum- 
cision. Upon the same grounds it has been assumed, 
that the duties of the fourth commandment were 
transferred from Jews to Christians, and from the 
seventh day of the week to the first, and with this 



64 

alteration were, immediately after the resurrection 
of Christ, observed by Christians, much in the same 
way as the precept had previously been kept by the 
Jewish nation. 

On this vague notion of a substitution of certain new 
religious ordinances at the introduction of the gospel, 
for rites of supposed correspondent signification under 
the Jewish economy, a considerable number of the un- 
scriptural observances that have been appended to 
Christianity since the time of the apostles, appear at 
present to have their main support. It requires, how- 
ever, little more than a slight consideration of the 
history of that period, and especially of the then 
existing state of public religion in Judea, to detect 
the fallacy on which this whole theory of '' substitu- 
tion" has its foundation. 

The opinion, for instance, that the ordinance of 
baptism was appointed at the beginning of the gospel, 
to occupy the room of the Jewish rite of circumcision, 
must be regarded as nothing more than a modern 
conjecture, which admits of no scriptural proof; for 
no instituted connexion between these two ordinan- 
ces, is ever mentioned either in the Old Testament 
or the New. It seems very unlikely that this notion 
of the one rite having assumed the place of the other, 
should have prevailed among the early christians ; for 
it is certain that all the Jewish believers continued 
to circumcise their male children, when eight days 
old, for forty years subsequent to the establishment 



65 

of the kingdom of Christ, precisely in the same man- 
ner as they had formerly done, prior to their being 
themselves baptized into the faith of the gospel. It 
is difficult to perceive in v^hat points these tv^o ordi- 
nances are at all analagous ;^ at all events, it seems 
very clear, that w^hile these first christians were ob- 
serving both rites at the same time, they at least 
could not well have entertained the notion that the 
one had been substituted for the other. 

The doctrine of the Westminster Assembly, that 
^'ever since the resurrection of Christ, God has 
appointed the first day of the week to be the christian 
sabbath," appears to have its foundation on a similar 
fallacious assumption. That at the resurrection of 
Christ, there was any alteration made in the pre- 

' The various ordinances of the Mosaic economy had all, no doubt, a peculiar 
spiritual signification, as well as the few and simple ordinances of Christianity; and 
in this respect, there certainly exists between them some degree of resemblance. 
Having all, however, accomplished the end for which they were appointed, they 
are now abolished ; and the emblematical meaning they possessed has been 
fulfilled, not by their being converted into ordinances of correspondent use 
and signification, but by a natural termination in the spiritual realities of the 
gospel. The Messiah, himself, came in the room of the Passover : " Christ 
our passover is sacrificed for us," That change of heart which all true believers 
experience, has come in the place of circumcision : for christians are now 
" circumcised with a circumcision made without hands ;" the Jewish circumci- 
sion, which was a figure of the moral renovation produced by the belief of the 
gospel, was external, and cut off a part of the flesh : the christian circumcision, 
namely, " the putting off the fleshly body of sin," is internal, and takes place 
without any manual operation. Thus, the passover and circumcision, as well as 
the various Jewish " meats and drinks, their holidays, their new moons, and 
sabbaths were all a shadow of good things to come ; but the body is of Christ." 

See Col. 2. passim, 

K 



66 

scriptions of the fourth commandment, or that the 
converts to the gospel were taught to sanctify the 
first day of the week instead of the seventh, are sup- 
positions destitute of all appearance of probability, 
and directly opposed to the whole current of sacred 
history. It is undeniable, that the seventh day 
sabbath continued, as has already been mentioned, 
to be observed by the Jewish nation, and by ail the 
Jewish believers of the gospel subsequent to the 
resurrection of Christ, precisely in the same way as it 
had been observed previous to the Messiah's advent. 
Now, when it is kept in mind that Judaism conti- 
nued for forty years after the setting up of Christ's 
kingdom to be the publicly professed religion through- 
out Judea, it must appear very improbable that any 
new sabbath should at that time have been viewed as 
the substitute of another, which at that very time, 
continued to be as universally and strictly observed 
as it had ever been at any former period. It is to be 
borne in mind also that there was no general expec- 
tation entertained at that time, of the impending fate 
of Jerusalem, of the catastrophe which shortly after- 
wards overturned the Jewish government. There is 
every reason to believe, indeed, that even among the 
christian converts, the opinion was very prevalent 
that the seventh day sabbath and several other ordi- 
nances of the Mosaic economy, were designed to 
retain their obligation under the new dispensation. 
It is well known that a considerable body of Jewish 



67 

believers continued to observe the Jev^^ish ritual long 
after the destruction of Jerusalem : so tenacious, 
indeed, were a number of them, of the notion of the 
perpetuity of the sabbatical law in particular, that 
they continued for several centuries to adhere to the 
observance of the seventh day, and succeeded in 
various places in prevailing on the general body of 
believers, to join them in the same Judaizing 
practice. 

On whatever other grounds then, the doctrine of a 
christian sabbath, as taught by the Westminster 
Assembly and others, can be maintained, it seems 
very clear, that the argument usually adduced in its 
support, from its being the supposed substitute of 
the weekly sabbath of the .Jewish nation, is very 
unsound and fallacious. The only sabbath observed 
in obedience to the fourth commandment, during the 
time that the apostles were the authoritative directors 
of christian obedience, was the seventh day of the 
week. This day was observed by the apostles them- 
selves, by the Jewish converts to the gospel, as also 
by the whole Jewish people. Than this sabbath, 
there is no evidence that the apostles and early 
christians ever observed any other : the conjecture 
that they did so, that for forty years they continued 
to observe two successive sabbath days weekly, in 
obedience to the same commandment, seems to be 
alike improbable and unfounded. 



68 

Having thus shortly considered the relation in 
which the Jewish believers of the gospel are recorded 
to have stood to the fourth commandment, during 
the apostolic age of Christianity ; proceed we now to 
inquire, whether there be any evidence of the sabba- 
tical observance which this commandment prescribes, 
having been transferred to the Gentile converts. As 
our situation corresponds more nearly with the cir- 
cumstances of this class of converts, than with those 
of the Jewish believers, the directions they received 
from the apostles, on this and on other questions of 
christian obligation, are deserving of especial consi- 
deration. It is, in fact, by placing ourselves in 
imagination, in the situation which they occupied ; 
and in this way considering the authoritative instruc- 
tions they received from Christ's apostles, that we 
can most satisfactorily ascertain the existing obliga- 
tion of the law of the sabbath, or of any other of the 
laws of Moses, as well as the nature and extent of 
^^ those things which Christ commanded," which 
are now the sole rule and standard of christian 
obedience. 

That the Jewish believers sanctified the seventh 
day of the week during the time of the apostles, in 
obedience to the fourth commandment, is matter of 
authentic history. The point we have to ascertain 
then, is simply this^ — Was the observance which 
this commandment prescribes, made obligatory on 
those christian converts who had never been the 



69 

subjects of the law of Moses ? On this question the 
whole controversy regarding the perpetuity of the 
law of the sabbath under the christian dispensation, 
seems in a great measure to hinge. 

Of these Gentile converts, there were two descrip- 
tions : the first, those who by the Jews were termed 
proselytes of the Gate, and who, in the New Testa- 
ment, are designated ''^ devout men," ''fearing God." 
They were persons apparently, who, benefiting by 
the knowledge diffused by those Jews that had settled 
in the various cities of the world, had renounced idol- 
atry, and become worshippers of the true God. Of 
such was Cornelius, of whom, though a Gentile, it is 
recorded, that " he feared God, and all his house." 
Though these devout Gentiles are supposed to have 
conformed to several of the observances of the INIosaic 
law, they did not wholly become proselytes to the 
Jewish religion. They abstained, however, from 
things offered unto idols, and never used blood in 
food, or the flesh of any animal strangled, as retain- 
ing the blood. The other description of converts 
were Gentile idolaters, who had been sunk in the 
gross darkness and debasing practices of pagan wor- 
ship. To them, the mission of the apostle Paul seems 
specially to have been directed : ''he was sent to them 
to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness 
to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." It 
is very necessary to bear in mind, the difference 
which at that period actually existed between these 



70 

two kinds of Gentile converts ; for unless this distinc- 
tion be attended to, we must ever fail to apprehend, 
with accuracy, the design of the apostles, in several 
of the directions they gave respecting the rule of 
christian duty. 

It is easy to trace three distinct periods in the 
apostolic history, in the first of which^ the church was 
kept in ignorance of the second, and had advanced 
far upon the second before the third was declared to 
them, and each by a special revelation. Their mi- 
nistry commenced with the Jews alone. It appears 
certain, that the apostles themselves did not then 
understand that it was ever to be extended beyond 
their countrymen. Their ancient national error was 
not yet removed, that through Judaism the world 
must be admitted to the benefits of the Messiah's 
advent, must be saved, not as the sons of fallen Adam, 
but as the children of righteous Abraham. Under 
this impression, they taught through Judea, Samaria, 
and at last at Antioch. 

Then it was, that by a special vision sent to Peter, 
his scruples were first removed, and he was made to 
understand by the conversion of Cornelius and his 
household, that a door was opened to the Gentiles. 
But to what Gentiles ? Not to all indiscriminately, 
but to such, as like Cornelius, were " devout Gen- 
tiles," ^^ fearing God;" otherwise known as prose- 
lytes of the gate. Gentiles, who, without becoming 
altogether Jews, had adopted their belief in the 



71 

one true God, and sought acceptance with him by 
fasting and by prayer. Yet of the baptism even of 
these, St. Peter's report to the church of Jerusalem, 
is but an apology ; " Forasmuch then as God gave 
them the like gift as he did unto us who believed on 
the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could with- 
stand God ?"^ 

Lastly, a further light broke forth on the church, 
when by another express revelation Paul and Barna- 
bas were separated for the conversion of the idolatrous 
Gentiles.* Of all the wonderful counsel of the Lord, 
this was considered the most wonderful. This it is 
which is especially styled ^^ the mystery of godliness," 
the revealing of which produced a sensation, both 
within and without the church, to which no one who 
would understand the WTitings and the history of the 
great apostle of the Gentiles, should be inattentive."'' 

The time which elapsed during the first of the 
three periods above referred to, is supposed to have 
been from A. D. 33 to A. D. 41 : from this to the 
extension of the gospel to the devout Gentiles, forms 
another period from A. D. 41 to A. D. 45. The 
latter period comprehends a term of twenty-five 
years, extending from A. D. 45 to A. D. 70, when 
Jerusalem was taken, the Jewish polity dissolved, and 
the grounds on which these distinctions were founded, 
were for ever removed. 

■ Acts xi. 17. * Acts xiii, 2. 

" Hind's History of the Rise and Progress of Christianity. Vol I, 144, 



72 

It is to be borne in mind then, that though the 
great facts of the gospel were testified to all these 
converts alike : though all these different classes were 
alike instructed in the true meaning of the death and 
resurrection of Jesus, the promised Messiah, "the son 
of the living God/' there was a considerable diffe- 
rence in the directions they received as regarded 
their respective personal obligations. While all who 
had been called, being circumcised, were directed to 
continue " in circumcision ;" those on the other hand, 
who had been called "in uncircumcision," were en- 
joined not to comply with any religious precept 
or custom, in obedience to the law. All conduct 
of this kind was strictly forbidden them, as being 
contrary to their allegiance to Christ their sole 
master, as well as inconsistent with the nature of 
that gospel liberty, wherewith Christ had made them 
free. This distinction in the respective obligations 
of the early believers, became a frequent source of 
misunderstanding and difference, in several of the 
churches. The Jewish believers, being " all zealous 
of the law," attempted to extend its obligation to 
their Gentile brethren, and some of them went so far 
as to maintain, that " except these persons were cir- 
cumcised after the manner of Moses they could not 
be saved.""" At Antioch, especially, this question 
was canvassed with great warmth and contention ; 

" Acts XV. 1. 



73 

so much so, as to render it necessary that the matter 
should be referred to the apostles and others resident 
in Jerusalem. 

Whether the decree that was issued on this occa- 
sion, related to all the Gentile converts, or merely to 
that portion of them who, previous to their conversion, 
had been proselytes of the gate, though a question of 
considerable interest and importance in other respects, 
is immaterial to the point at present under considera- 
tion, namely, the relation in which christians now 
stand to the law of Moses. As there were no converted 
idolaters in the church of Antioch at that time, it is 
more than probable, that the decree had a peculiar 
reference to the ^^ devout Gentiles" there and else- 
where, who had embraced the gospel, and was de- 
signed for their government exclusively : but whe- 
ther or not this were the case, it is certain that its 
contents determine beyond all controversy, the entire 
repeal of every Mosaic precept, as such, under the 
christian dispensation. 

In answer to the Judaizing teachers, who clamo- 
rously contended, '^ That it was needful to circumcise 
them [the Gentile converts^ and to command them 
to keep the law of Moses,"'"" it was authoritatively 
decided by the apostles, '^ We have concluded that 
they keep no such thing. "^ 

The things excepted in the apostolic decree, 
" meats offered to idols, fornication, things strangled. 

Acts XV, 5. ^ Acts xxi, 25, 



74 

and blood/' from all of which these converts were 
enjoined to abstain, were probably that part of the 
Jewish ceremonial, which these " devout Gentile" 
converts had been accustomed to observe prior to 
their embracing the gospel. This supposition seems 
to be countenanced by the speech of the apostle 
James, who, in delivering his opinion, speaks as if he 
thought, that in enjoining a compliance with these 
customs, he ^^was not troubling them, who, from 
among the Gentiles had turned to God," or placing 
any yoke on their necks, which they had not borne 
previous to their conversion. It seems, in fact, to have 
been the prevailing opinion of all the leading men of 
the council, that it was not desirable to impose any 
restraint upon the new converts, which existing cir- 
cumstances did not call for ; and the reason that ap- 
pears to have weighed with them, to enjoin the keep- 
ing up of the few religious customs which the Gentile 
proselytes had observed prior to the introduction of 
the gospel, was, that the shock might, by the retention 
of these forms, be obviated, which naturally would 
have been given to Jewish prejudices by their neglect, 
and especially by the disregard of the ancient and 
scrupulously observed precept regarding abstinence 
from blood. That this was their reason for specify- 
ing these practices, seems to be implied in the 
apostle's concluding words : " For Moses of old time 
hath, in every city, them that preach him, being read 
in the synagogue every sabbath day.^ 

y Acts XV, 21. 



75 

With the exception of these few customs/ the 
observance of which^ it is evident^ was enjoined on 
the grounds of existing expediency, it was decided 
by the apostles, that from '' the law of Moses/' the 
Gentile converts should be wholly exempted. Among 
the things excepted, it is to be observed, neither the 
observance of the sabbath, nor the decalogue itself, 
is included : it seems natural, therefore, to infer, 
that this code of national law, and the sabbatical 
institution comprised in it, were not considered by 
the apostles of Christ, as connected with the kingdom 
of heaven, or as retaining any obligation on Christ's 
disciples. 

This conclusion seems so obviously to follow, from 
the authoritative decision of the apostles, and is also 
so accordant with the evident scope of numerous 
passages in the apostolic epistles, that it appears to 
be impossible, without a constant straining of some 
of the plainest and most explicit statements contained 
in the sacred volume, to avoid arriving at it. Owing 
however, to indistinct views having been entertained 
of the grounds of moral obligation, and, to the adop- 

2. That an abstinence from fornication, wiiich certainly it is not usual now to 
call a religious custom, should have been coupled with the ceremonial practices 
specified in the decree, will not appear strange to any one who bears in mind 
how greatly the moral sense, in respect to this vice, was injured by the opinions 
and practices that, at that time, prevailed in the Gentile world. The practice was 
not regarded as a sin ; its excess only, was held to be blameworthy. It formed 
indeed a part of the Pagan worship, and among the Hindoos and others is ac- 
tually a religious custom at the present time. 

See on this subject, Hind's History, 



76 

tion by a certain school of theologians, of the Judai- 
cal decalogue as the foundation and rule of christian 
obedience, the inference, that the Gentile converts 
were exempted from the law as a whole, natural 
and obvious as it is, has, in various quarters, been 
studiously evaded. That this conclusion, though 
entirely accordant with the whole tenor of the New 
Testament, greatly interferes with the long establish- 
ed arrangements of the popular systems of divinity to 
which we refer, is sufficiently obvious. It has been 
assumed, '' that the moral law is comprehended in 
the ten commandments ;" and from this assumption, 
it has hastily been inferred, that, as every moral 
precept is of perpetual and indispensable obligation, 
no portion of this code of laws can possibly have 
been included in the things from which the Gentile 
converts were exempted. By identifying in this 
manner, the Judaical code of national law, with the 
eternal and universal rule of moral obhgation, the 
apostolic doctrine of the entire abrogatio?i of the 
Mosaic law, has been strenuously opposed, as under- 
mining the whole foundation of christian morality. 

We readily admit, that were it correct that the 
moral law is comprehended in the ten command- 
ments, and that this code of national law is the 
foundation of moral obligation, the refusal to recog- 
nize the inference which naturally follows from the 
apostolic decision, would, however difficult to recon- 
cile with some of the most explicit declarations of 



77 

scripture, be supported by reasons of no ordinary 
weight and importance. It is an unquestionable 
truth, that every precept of a moral nature, is of 
perpetual and indispensable obligation : neither can 
we conceive it possible that any law of this kind can 
be abrogated so long as a relation between man as a 
rational and accountable being, and God, as his 
Creator and judge, continues to exist. 

The question, it is obvious, is not at all whether 
the Gentile converts were exempted by the apostolic 
decree, from any moral precept : that they w^ere not, 
is on all hands admitted. But though this is quite 
true, W'C conceive it is not correct to affirm, that pre- 
cepts of this kind retained their obligation on account 
of their being specified by Moses. That there were 
numerous moral precepts sanctioned by temporal re- 
wards and punishments, incorporated with the Mosaic 
economy, is clear beyond all dispute ; it would 
indeed, have been very remarkable, if a system of 
civil and religious polity of divine origin and con- 
struction, like that erected among the Jewish nation, 
had not comprised numerous precepts of immutable 
obligation ; for even governments purely political, 
that are founded on considerations of expediency, 
find it necessary to adopt various laws which have 
a foundation in the principles of moral rectitude. 
There is no evidence, however, that the apostles con- 
sidered it necessary to separate the moral portion of 
the national law of Judea, from that part which was 



78 

ceremonial in order to secure the interests of chris- 
tian morality. 

The decalogue was^ at that time, it is to be borne 
in mind, the established law of the Hebrew common- 
wealth, and was enforced, by temporal penalties, on 
every member of the community. The apostles 
accordingly, uniformly speak of the law as a whole, 
without making any distinction between its duties ; 
and declare concerning it, that the Gentile converts 
were exempted from its obligation : every duty of a 
moral nature remained, of course, in force ; but 
every precept which it specified, whether moral or 
ceremonial, was disannulled in as far as the authority 
of Moses was concerned. 

It is to be remembered also, that though these 
converts were thus declared to be free from this code 
of national law as such, as well as from all the other 
commandments of Moses, they were taught to recog- 
nize the natural law of conscience, which '' had been 
written in their hearts"^ before the gospel had been 
made known to them. This law of conscience em- 
braced every moral duty which the decalogue 
specified, as well as every other precept included in 
the principles of the love of God and our neighbour. 

It is obvious indeed, that the grounds of moral 
obligation, were then, and at every former period, 
wholly independent of the Judaical decalogue ; for 
every moral duty must have been binding long prior 

^ Romans ii, 15. 



79 

to the promulgation of the law at Mount Sinai. If it 
had been otherwise^ — if the sinfulness of murder, for 
instance, had depended on its being a violation of the 
sixth commandment, those who lived previous to the 
time of Moses would have been innocent of that 
crime, though chargeable T\dth imbruing their hands 
in the blood of their fellow men. It is manifest that, 
as every moral precept must have been in force 
previous to the giving of the Mosaic law, it naturally 
continued to be binding on all men, not only during 
the existence of that law, but subsequent to its abro- 
gation. As all duties of this kind, therefore, were 
supposed to be obhgatory on the Gentile converts as 
human beings, prior to their conversion, they were 
supposed to be binding on them afterwards ; not 
indeed, because they were specified in the decalogue, 
but because, from their own nature, they were consi- 
dered to be obligatory, independent of every written 
code of laws w^hatever. 

The question then, we repeat, is not whether the 
Gentile converts were exempted from any moral 
precept, but whether the decalogue and the sabbati- 
cal observance it prescribes were not considered, in 
the apostolic age, to be an integral part of the Mosaic 
institution. That they were viewed in this light at 
that time, seems to be indubitable : for at that very 
time, this code of laws continued to constitute an 
essential part of the Jewish civil and religious govern- 
ment, and was enforced, not only on the unconverted 



80 

Jews^ but on the apostles themselves, and on all the 
Jewish believers of the gospel. The point, in fact, 
actually debated at the council of Jerusalem, was, 
'' whether it was needful to command the Gentile 
converts to keep the law of Moses ;" words which 
plainly import that the question under consideration 
was, whether the law% viewing it as a whole religious 
dispensation, should be imposed on them. It was 
accordingly the express object of the decree issued 
by the apostles, conclusively to settle this question, 
by authoritatively exempting these converts from 
every prescription of the law of Moses as such, en- 
joining upon them at the same time, the observance 
of the few religious practices the decree specified. 
" They were delivered from the law, that being dead" 
under which the Jewish people were held, and were 
'^ married to another even to Him who is raised 
from the dead."^ 

It has already been suggested that the question of 
the existing obligation of the law of the sabbath, 
resolves itself into a simple question of fact, w^hich, 
like all other matters of fact, can be determined 
solely by proper evidence. This evidence lies ^^ithin 
a very narrow compass, and seems to be both clear 
and decisive in determining the points with which we 
are concerned. 

Of any other sabbath than the Mosaic one, which 
continued to be observed even by the Jewish believers 

^ Romans vii, 4-6. 



81 

of the gospel, for forty years subsequent to the death 
of Christ, there is no mention made in the New 
Testament writings. That the seventh day of the 
week continued to be kept as a holy sabbath during 
the whole of the apostolic age of Christianity, is mat- 
ter of unquestionable history. Now, whether we con- 
sider the recorded practice of the Jewish believers, in 
reference to this sabbatical institution, or that of the 
Gentile converts, the conclusion seems to be, on all 
sides, corroborated and confirmed, that the obser- 
vance was, at that period, viewed as being entirely a 
prescription of the law of Moses, and as having no 
connexion with the institutions of "the kingdom of 
heaven." The fact of the seventh day of the week con- 
tinuing for forty years, subsequent to the first setting 
up of Christ's kingdom in the world, to be sanctified 
in obedience to the fourth commandment by all the 
Jewish believers of the gospel, is surely very irrecon- 
cilable with the assumption, " that the duties of the 
fourth commandment were transferred at the resur- 
rection of Christ to the first day of the week, and 
with this alteration, retained their obligation on 
Christ's disciples." 

The question however, which it is of greatest 
importance to ascertain, as bearing most decisively 
upon the point at issue, is, whether the obser- 
vance of the fourth commandment was enjoined on 
those converts, who had not previously been subjects 
of the law of Moses? On this point, the testimony of 



82 

the New Testament is alike explicit and conclusive. 
When the question was agitated and formally 
discussed, whether ^^ it was needful to command 
the Gentile converts to keep the law of Moses," 
the matter was set at rest by the authoritative 
judgment of the apostles : '^ We have concluded 
that they observe no such thing." As these 
converts were thus expressly exempted from the 
law as a whole, they must have been exempted 
from the observance of the sabbath as entirely, as 
from any of its prescriptions. As there is no other 
sabbatical ordinance ever mentioned in the New 
Testament, save that prescribed in the Judaical 
decalogue, it seems naturally to follow, that the law 
of the sabbath, was viewed by the apostles of Christ, 
as an integral part of the Mosaic dispensation, and as 
destined to terminate with that system of civil and 
religious polity, with which it had, in divine wisdom, 
been originally incorporated. We conceive then, 
that by these and other unquestionable facts, all un- 
equivocally expressive of the mind and will of God 
upon the matter, the entire abrogation of the law of 
the sabbath under the christian dispensation, is be- 
yond all reasonable doubt determined. 



SECTION III. 

THE SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE EXISTING 
OBLIGATION OF THE LAW OF THE SABBATH FURTHER 
CONSIDERED. 

The conclusions at which we have arrived, namely, 
that the weekly sabbath was viewed by the apostles as 
an integral part of the Jewish economy, and that all 
the early christians, who, prior to their conversion, 
had not been subjects of the law of Moses, were ex- 
empted from its obligation, appear to receive consi- 
derable corroboration from various passages which 
occur in the apostolic epistles. 

That no certain portion of time has been appointed 
under the gospel, to be observed as more holy than 
another, seems clearly to be implied in the following 
words of the apostle Paul : — '' One man esteemeth 
one day above another : another esteemeth every 
day alike [^holy.^ Let every man be fully persuaded 
in his own mind."'' 

Among '' the saints in Rome," to whom this epistle 

" Rom. xiv. 5. 



84 

is addressed, we learn from its contents there were both 
Jewish and Gentile believers : though Paul was not 
personally acquainted at this time with the christians 
resident in that city, he seems to have been quite 
aware, that there existed among them a considerable 
diversity of opinion regarding their respective obliga- 
tions as to the observance of certain meats and days : 
for the amicable arrangements of these differences, 
and with a view, apparently, to allay the heats of 
'' the doubtful disputations" that were likely to occur 
on various points of this nature, he recommended to 
all, the exercise of charity on the one hand, and a 
full persuasion of personal duty on the other. That 
they would all think and act alike upon these 
matters, he seems to have thought was not in the 
nature of things, to be looked for : every one, how- 
ever, was bound to act on his personal convictions of 
duty ; for whatever was the nature of the action itself, 
if performed with any doubt or scruple regarding its 
lawfulness, it necessarily became, to that person, a 
sinful one : '' for whatever is not of faith, (that is, 
whatever is done without a conviction of it being 
lawful) is sin." 

If the distinctions which existed between the 
various classes of converts, of which the christian 
church was then composed, be kept in recollection, 
this exhortation to exercise mutual forbearance, and 
to allow every one " to follow the full persuasion of 
his own mind," will appear very natural and 



85 

extremely judicious. After making due allowance, 
however, for the circumstance of these various classes 
recognizing in some particulars, different rules of re- 
ligious obedience ; if we adopt the modern supposition, 
that there was a christian law then in force, which re- 
quired the sanctification of a weekly portion of time 
to God's exclusive service, the propriety of the apos- 
tle's counsel must necessarily appear very question- 
able. If the observance of the first, or any other day 
of the week, had at that time been enjoined as a 
christian duty, the law must have been regarded by 
all to be of indispensable obligation : were we to 
suppose therefore, that the observance of a weekly 
sabbath had actually been commanded, we should be 
greatly at a loss to conceive how Paul could, in that 
case, have been warranted in affirming, '^that he 
that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not 
regard it." It is utterly inconceivable that any 
christian, whether of Jewish or Gentile extraction, 
could possibly have manifested his allegiance to 
Christ, by not regarding the observance of any one 
day, and '' esteeming every day alike holy," if the 
observance of a certain day as more holy than 
others, had formed a part of "the things which Christ 
had commanded." 

Another passage corroborative of the same conclu- 
sion, occurs in the epistle to the Colossians : — 
" Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, 
or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or 



86 

of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to 
come, but the body is of Christ.'"^ 

" From this text/' says Bishop Horsley, '' no less a 
man than the venerable Calvin drew the conclusion, 
that the sanctification of the seventh day is no indis- 
pensable duty in the christian church — that it is one of 
those carnal ordinances of the Jewish religion which 
our Lord hath blotted out." " Mr. Baxter observes, 
with his usual spirit," says the candid Doddridge, 
*' that we may well wonder at those good men that 
can find the prohibition of a form of prayer, or a 
written sermon in the second commandment, and yet 
cannot find the abrogation of the Jewish law relating 
to the sabbath, in these plain words of the apostle. 
For it is certainly most arbitrary to pretend that 
these words do not include a weekly sahhath, when 
there was no other solemnity so generally signified 
by that name."^ 

It is Paul's design in the paragraph of which these 
verses form a part, to exhort the Colossian believers 
to adhere in their religious obedience, closely and 
stedfastly to the authority of Christ, "as the 
supreme head of all government and power." He 
acquaints them that their fulness was in Him, who 
had blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that 
stood against them, having nailed it to his cross : and 
that having been buried with Christ in baptism, they 
were also raised to life with him, by the procurement 

*" Col. ii. 16, 17. , ' Dodd. Expos, in loco. 



87 

of an entire confidence in God, who raised Christ 
from the dead. He farther instructs them, that, 
having thus died with Christ, and become wholly 
dead to the law by a gracious pardon of all their 
transgressions, they were made complete in the 
knowledge of their duty by the revealed will of 
Christ, and ought not to suffer any one to rule them 
in meats or in drinks, or in respect of an holy day, or 
the new moon, or sabbath days. The scope of his 
exhortation seems to be this : — " Let no man be al- 
lowed to call you to account for the exercise of that 
liberty to which you have been called : these carnal 
ordinances of the Jews, their meats, and drinks, and 
sabbaths, and other holy seasons, were merely a 
shadow of blessings to come ; — the substance of 
which is Christ's body, the church." 

It ought to be borne in mind, that when Paul 
wrote this Epistle, the seventh day sabbath continued 
to be observed in obedience to the fourth command- 
ment, by the Jewish nation, and all the Jewish be- 
lievers of the Gospel throughout the world. The 
apostle did not find fault with this, for he himself 
continued to observe the sabbath : it seems very im- 
probable however, that he would have used language 
like that in the passage before us, exhorting Chris- 
tians to resist those who presumed to judge them 
for refusing to keep the sabbaths, and reprehending 
their observance of all days of this kind as imposing 
ordinances on themselves, according to the doctrines 



88 

and commandments of men, if he had held the moderi 
doctrine, that the fourth commandment retained it 
obligation under the gospel, or if, indeed, he had 
thought there was any law at all then in force, 
requiring the observance of a weekly sabbath as an 
institution of " the kingdom of heaven." 

Another passage to the same purpose, occurs 
in the epistle to the Galatians : — '^ How turn ye 
again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto 
ye desire again to be in bondage ? Ye observe days, 
and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of 
you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."^ 

" By days, in this passage," says Macknight, " the 
Apostle means the Jewish weekly sabbaths, by 
seasons, the annual festivals, by years, the sabbatical 
years and Jubilees."^ In the apostolic writings it is 
deserving of notice, the weekly sabbath is usually 
classed with the abrogated ordinances of the Mosaic 
law, and is familiarly spoken of, as if, at that time, 
it was universally understood to be an integral part 
of the Jewish economy. The general tenor of Paul's 
writings in particular, in reference to this ordinance, 
seems altogether irreconcilable with the supposition 
that he was in the practice of inculcating its observ- 
ance on the subjects of the new covenant. This ex- 
postulation with the Christians in Galatia for 
instance, appears alike natural and forcible, if we 

Gal. iv. 9-11. ' Macknight in loco. 



89 

keep in mind the facts of the case ; that the Gentile 
converts, though exempted from this, as well as from 
the other prescriptions of the Mosaic law, had, by 
listening to the insidious doctrines of some Judaizing 
teachers, been reverting to the weak and beggarly 
elements of Judaism, instead of standing fast in that 
liberty wherewith Christ had made them free. The 
apostle uniformly taught, that Christ was the end 
of the law, for justification to every one, whether 
Jew or Gentile, who believed on him ; and that the 
subjects of the new covenant were, as such, no 
longer under Moses : '^ they were become dead to 
that law," under which the subjects of the old cove- 
nant had been held. 

As the Mosaic constitution remained undissolved 
until the destruction of Jerusalem, all the Jewish 
believers resident in Judea, continued, as has already 
been mentioned, under a civil obligation to conform 
to all the Mosaic precepts, whether moral, civil, or 
ceremonial ; it appears that those of them who 
were domiciled in Greece and Italy, and who were 
in the practice of periodically revisiting Jerusalem at 
the different Jewish festivals, were also indulged in 
their natural attachment to the religious observances 
of their ancestors. There were several of the Hel- 
lenistic Jews, we learn, who, not content with this 
indulgence, attempted, in their ignorant zeal for the 
law, to prevail on the Gentile converts to join them 
in its observance. The obtrusion of these Judaical 



90 

notions, seems to have furnished a constant bone of 
contention to the churches, during the whole of the 
apostoHc age : and, as several of the Gentile believers 
manifested a strong disposition to adopt the obser- 
vance of the weekly sabbath, and some other .Jewish 
observances, they incurred the warm rebuke and 
earnest expostulation of the apostle : ^^ Why are ye 
turning back to these weak and beggarly elements, 
observing days, and months, and years ? I am afraid 
of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in 
vain." 

On the supposition that Paul taught the doctrine 
of the entire abolition of the law, his language on 
this and other similar occasions, appears extremely 
natural, and his rebuke perfectly just: if we suppose, 
however, that he taught the doctrine of the per- 
petuity of the sabbath, his expostulation is divested 
of its principal force. For how could these Galatian 
christians have been so much to blame for reverting 
to the observance of a weekly sabbath, if they had 
been taught, that the fourth commandment retained 
its obligation under the christian dispensation ? If 
we admit the natural and unstrained meaning of 
the numerous passages in the New Testament, 
which state, that the law, viewing it as a whole, has 
been done away with, Paul's reasoning, in this and 
in various others of his epistles, cannot fail to appear 
as being alike clear and conclusive : on any other 
interpretation of these passages, the apostle's mean- 



91 

ing must ever, we conceive, be very partially under- 
stood, if it be not indeed wholly misapprehended. 

When it is remembered, that, notwithstanding the 
virtual abrogation of the law by the finished work of 
the Messiah, the Mosaic economy as a political insti- 
tution, remained then, in appearance, wholly unaf- 
fected by the introduction of the gospel ; the lucid 
and forcible terms in which the apostle taught the 
great truth of the abolition of the law, and the bold 
and uncompromising manner in which he practically 
maintained the doctrine of christian liberty,^ must 
appear to furnish no unimportant evidence of that 
divine inspiration, which, as an apostle of Christ, he 
possessed. While outwardly he was complying with 
the Jewish observances, he inwardly had outgrown the 
law, and was rejoicing in Christ Jesus, having confi- 
dence in nothing else. To forward the progress of 
others in the knowledge of this liberty, and to encou- 
rage them to stand fast in it, were leading objects in 
all his epistles to the christian churches. To this cir- 
cumstance, all who would now thoroughly understand 
the nature of that christian liberty for which Paul 
contended, and the general scope and true meaning 
of his writings, will do well to attend. 

It is to be remembered, that an obligation to 
sanctify a determinate portion of time to God's 
worship and service, can arise solely from an express 

See Galatians ii. 



92 

revelation of the divine will, for without such a 
revelation, it is impossible in the nature of things, 
that men could discover any reason for consider- 
ing one portion of time to be more holy than 
another. Apart from the knowledge derived from 
an express precept, there can be no intrinsic holiness, 
as far the human mind can discern, in the seventh 
day of the week, or in the first, more than in the 
third, or fourth, or fifth. If the observance of the 
first, or any other day of the week, as a holy sabbath, 
has been enjoined on the subjects of the new cove- 
nant, this duty must necessarily be of indispensable 
obligation: of any command of this kind however, 
the New Testament contains no record. In the ab- 
sence, therefore, of all evidence of such a command, 
the inference seems to be inevitable, that Christianity 
recognizes no distinction of days, and leaves its sub- 
jects at perfect liberty ^' to esteem every day alike 
holy." 

There are some, however, who seem to think that 
the mention of the first day of the week, which it 
appears, occurs three times in the New Testament, 
ought to be regarded as a proof of the first christians 
having kept that day as a weekly sabbath. With 
how little reason this notion has been entertained, 
a very brief examination of all the cases in which 
the mention of this day occurs, will suffice to show. 

It may be proper to premise, that the question is not 
at all concerning the lawfulness and propriety of the 



93 

practice, which at present prevails, of christians hold- 
ing their stated convocations for worship on the first 
day of the week : the existing expediency of this 
estabUshed custom is by no one controverted. The 
point we have to determine, is not the expediency of 
the present practice, but the existence of a sabbatical 
law, and the consequent obligation resulting from 
this law on all Christ's disciples, to separate a deter- 
minate portion of time from a common to a sacred 
use. If such a law be now in force, the disciples of 
Christ are doubtless bound to obey it : if no such 
law exists, they ought to beware of imposing on 
themselves or others, the traditions and command- 
ments of men. 

The mention of the first day of the week occurs 
John XX. 19, Acts xx. 7, 1 Cor. xvi. 2. In each of 
these cases the expression is naturally interwoven 
with the context, in which, it is to be observed, there 
is not the slightest allusion to any sabbatical obser- 
vance : in the absence of all evidence of the promul- 
gation of a divine command, it seems very preposte- 
rous to suppose, that the apparently incidental 
mention of the first day of the week in a general 
narrative, was designed to be understood as implying 
that the observance of that day as a weekly sabbath, 
was to be a duty of indispensable obligation on 
Christ's followers until the end of time. To construe 
the casual mention of a particular day of the week 
in an artless narrative, into an authoritative prece- 



94 

dent for the observance of a holy sabbath^ is surely 
to violate every correct rule of biblical interpretation-, 
and to apply the sacred history to a purpose for 
which the sacred historian never designed it. 

In the first of these passages it is recorded, " that 
the same day at evening, being the first day of the 
week, when the doors were shut where the disciples 
were assembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jesus, 
and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, 
peace be unto you." This was the same day on 
which Jesus rose from the dead; and it is probable 
the disciples had not previously met together since 
their dispersion at Christ's apprehension. Whatever 
may have been the object of their meeting on this 
occasion, the circumstance of it being mentioned that 
they were assembled with shut doors for fear of the 
Jews, when Christ first appeared to them, which was 
on the evening of the first day of the week, cannot, 
surely, be correctly interpreted as furnishing any 
evidence of their keeping Sunday at that time as 
a holy sabbath. It is certain that the meeting was 
not convened in obedience to Christ's authority, 
neither was it held for christian worship : for, at 
that time, the disciples had not all learned that Jesus 
had risen from the dead : and we are told that when 
he did first stand in the midst of them, ^' they were 
terrified and affrighted, and supposed they had seen 
a spirit."' 

' Luke xxiv. 37. 



95 

The nature of this and of the other meetings 
between the risen Saviour and his disciples^ during 
the time he remained on earth, is so far removed 
from the ordinary objects of christian intercourse, 
that it seems altogether improper to interpret 
any particular circumstance attending such inter- 
views as designed to constitute an authoritative 
precedent for christians in future ages to follow. It 
is certain that he appeared on different other days 
of the week besides the first ; See John xxi. 3, ^.'^ 
— it is expressly stated, indeed, " that he shewed 
himself alive by many infallible proofs, being seen 
of the disciples forty days, and speaking of the 
things pertaining to the kingdom of God.''^ 

It seems then to be very arbitrary and unreason- 
able to attach any importance to the mention of any 
one day, seeing that he was seen of the disciples for 
forty days. Whether the expression John xx. 26, 
" after eight days," that is, eight days after the day 
of Christ's resurrection, refers to the following 
Sunday, or as the words seem more naturally to 
indicate, to the day after, is a question wholly imma- 
terial to the point under consideration. The parti- 
cular day of the week on which the incredulity of 

In this passage it is mentioned that on the next morning after that dmj, on 

which Peter and others went a-fishing, Jesus appeared to them standing on the 

shore. On whatever other day of the week this took place, it certainly could 

not have been on the first ; for it was not lawful, at that time, to go a-fishing on 

Saturday, the sabbath day. 

' Acts i. 3. 



96 



Thomas was .removed is a matter of small moment 
compared \vith the removal itself — the leading sub- 
ject evidently of the narrative. To infer the 
existence of a positive duty like that of a sabbatical 
observance, from the time being mentioned at which 
a supernatural meeting of this kind took place, seems 
to be alike preposterous and unwarrantable. A lead- 
ing object of these extraordinary interviews was, 
doubtless, to communicate instruction to the disciples 
regarding the nature of that kingdom which they 
were to become instrumental in setting up in the 
world : and to qualify the apostles for the duties of 
that embassy on which they were shortly afterwards 
to be sent. It was not until the day of pentecost, 
when, by the descent of the holy spirit, they were 
endued with power from on high, that the christian 
dispensation, correctly speaking, commenced. Then 
it was that the kingdom of Christ was set up, and 
that the good news of a free and full forgiveness of 
sin through Jesus the true Messiah, and of a com- 
plete justification from all things from wliich men 
could not possibly have been justified by the law of 
Moses, were first openly proclaimed. It is not from 
the extraordinary events that occurred in the interval 
between Christ's resurrection and ascension, but from 
the inspired history of the rise and progress of 
Christ's kingdom in the world, and from the recorded 
practice of those disciples who acted in obedience to 
the apostles, that we can most satisfactorily ascertain 



97 

that will of Christ, which constitutes the sole rule 
of obedience under the gospel. 

The second occurrence of the first day of the 
week, is in Acts xx. 7 : '^ And upon the first day of 
the week, when the disciples came together to break 
bread, Paul preached to them, ready to depart on 
the morrow; and continued his speech until mid- 
night." This appears to be the only case on record, in 
which it is certain that the disciples met for christian 
purposes on the first day of the week, during New 
Testament times. In this instance, as well as the 
others, their meeting on this day, is e^ddently not 
the leading subject of the narrative of which it forms 
a part: it serves simply as an introduction to the 
account that follows, of the accident that befel the 
young man named Eutychus, and of his miracu- 
lous cure by Paul. It is difficult to say whether 
this meeting was a stated or an occasional one ; but 
however this may have been, it is plain, there is no 
part of the narrative that affords any support to 
the conjecture, that the christians at Troas observed 
the first day of the week as a holy sabbath ; neither 
is it implied that they attached any importance 
to that day more than to any other. It is cer- 
tain, that at other places, the disciples assembled 
for christian purposes on various other days of 
the week. At Jerusalem, they continued daily to 
break bread from house to house."" We read, that at 

" Acts ii. 46. 



98 

Philippi, Paul and his companions met at a river 
side, where prayer was wont to be made, on the 
sabbath.'' It seems to have been Paul's stated 
practice to preach the gospel on that day. See 
Acts xiii. 14-42 ; — xviii. 4. The Hebrews were 
enjoined not to forsake the assembling of themselves 
together, but to exhort one another every day,"" It 
is thus manifest that the early christians met on dif- 
ferent other days of the week besides the first. That 
it was their regular practice to meet every day for 
christian purposes, does not clearly appear ; it seems 
to be extremely probable, however, that they were 
in the practice of holding their meetings very fre- 
quently. It is to be remembered, that at that time, 
christians did not possess the important advantage, 
which their successors do now, of perusing in private 
the different books w^hich compose the New Testa- 
ment. Their progress in christian knowledge de- 
pended almost entirely on mutual instruction, con- 
veyed orally in their social intercourse. As a consi- 
derable portion of the first converts (of the Gentile 
converts especially) needed to be carried forward 
from the first elements of religious knowledge, it 
doubtless would be found necessary to meet with 
them, for purposes of instruction, very often. How 
often they did regularly meet, for this and other 
christian objects, cannot now certainly be determined : 
but from the numerous indications that occur in the 

° Acts xvi. 13. ° Hebrews iii. 13. 



99 

apostolic epistles^ of the close intimacy that existed 
among the primitive believers, it is highly probable, 
that their stated convocations were held much oftener 
than once a week. Waving this however, as various 
meetings are expressly mentioned to have taken 
place on different days of the week, it seems to be 
extremely arbitrary to attach any importance to the 
mention of a single meeting at Troas on a Sunday. 
It is impossible to say whether, at that time, it was 
the established custom to meet at Troas on the first 
day, or whether the meeting that is mentioned, 
was specially convened on account of Paul's ap- 
proaching departure and farewell address. This 
much is certain, that there is nothing whatever in 
any part of this narrative of the miraculous cure of 
Eutychus, which gives any countenance to the con- 
jecture, that the christians at Troas kept, at that 
time, the first day of the week as a holy sabbath. 

The only other passage in which the mention of 
the first day of the week occurs, is in the first epistle 
to the Corinthians, xvi. 2. '' Upon the first day of 
the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as 
God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings 
when I come." 

This injunction relates to a pecuniary collection 
for the relief of certain disciples in Judea, who at 
that time, it appears, were situated in very destitute 
circumstances. The apostle wished, that '^ the 
bounty" which the Corinthians, sometime before, had 



100 

signified they were preparing, might be ready on his 
arrival; in order that he might carry it along with 
him, when he proceeded from Corinth to Jerusalem. 
To every one who is at the pains of examining the 
scope of this part of Paul's letter, it must be quite 
apparent, that the apostle is not speaking at all, in 
any part of the context, of the observance of the 
first day of the week, or of any other day, as a holy 
sabbath. The words simply convey an injunction, 
that each one of them should lay hy him (probably 
at home) a certain portion of money, in order that 
the whole of the intended donation might be prepa- 
red, and ready to bestow as a bounty, on Paul's 
arrival. This direction regarding the proper ar- 
rangement of a special act of pecuniary benevolence, 
does not furnish, so far as we can discern, any deci- 
sive evidence that the Corinthians held, at that time, 
their stated convocations for worship, once a week. 
It is, no doubt, quite possible that this may have been 
the case ; but there is certainly nothing mentioned 
from which it can positively be inferred. According 
to the natural meaning of the injunction, the arrange- 
ment advised was to be private, " let every one of 
you lay hy Mm in store,'' the amount he proposed to 
contribute. This was recommended to be begun 
immediately, and continued weekly, in order that 
there might be no gatherings when Paul arrived. 
This appears to be the obvious unstrained meaning 
of the words viewed in connexion ^vith the context : 



101 

to interpret them as furnishing a proof of the cor- 
rectness of the conjecture, that the Corinthians were 
then in the practice of keeping Sunday as a weeekly 
sabbath, is an unnatural straining of the passage, to 
serve a purpose wholly foreign from its original ap- 
plication and design. 

It is usual with many of the advocates of the per- 
petuity of the sabbath, to attach a great importance 
to an expression which occurs in the first chapter of 
the Apocalypse, " I was in the spirit on the Lord's 
day, and heard behind me a great voice as of a trum- 
pet, saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and 
the last, and what thou seest write in a book, and 
send it to the seven churches which are in Asia."P 

It has been assumed, that the term the Lord's day 
was used by the apostle John, to designate the first 
day of the week as a day dedicated to the honour of 
Jesus Christ ; and, on the ground of this conjecture, 
it has been maintained, that this use of the expres- 
sion is a plain proof of Sunday having been kept as 
a sabbath, or holy day, when the Apocalypse was 
written. We are disposed to think, that this infe- 
rence has usually been drawn with a haste and confi- 
dence, for which the nature of the premises furnishes 
little warrant. As the phrase in question is, at pre- 
sent, almost universally understood as synonymous 
with Sunday, considered as a holy day, it is, no 

' Rev.i. 10-11. 



102 

doubt very natural to affix this meaning to the ex- 
pression when we meet with it in Scripture : that it 
was used in this sense however, by John, in the pre- 
sent instance ; or that this was its current understood 
signification, at the time when he v/rote ; or that 
the sentiments which are now prevalent, respecting 
the first day of the week, were entertained in the 
apostolic age, appear to be all gratuitous assump- 
tions, insusceptible of any satisfactory proof. 

On a subject so conjectural in its nature, we 
feel no disposition to speak with any degree of confi- 
dence. The same literal expression occurs no where 
else in the scriptures, and its precise signification in 
this sole instance of its occurrence, as well as that of 
various other words that occur in this mysterious 
prophecy, it seems difficult, satisfactorily to ascer- 
tain. It is certain, that there is no account of 
the divine appointment of any sacred day of this 
name, recorded in the scriptures ; neither is there any 
evidence of any festival or sacred season of any des- 
cription whatever, having been observed by Christ's 
followers during the apostolic age. It has been sup- 
posed by many, indeed, that the early believers were 
in the practice of celebrating Christ's resurrection, on 
the first day of the week : this, however, is also a 
pure conjecture, which admits of no scriptural proof. 
That it must be highly profitable for christians in 
every age of the world to commemorate the resur- 
rection, and the other facts of the gospel, at all their 



103 

social meetings^ can admit of no doubt : there has 
no command been given^ however, to do this more 
particularly at one time than at another. In the 
absence of all evidence of the first day of the week 
having been celebrated in commemoration of the re- 
surrection, during New Testament times, it seems 
very arbitrary to assume, that the term the Lord's 
day was then understood as synonymous with a reli- 
gious festival held on Sunday, or that it had any 
peculiar reference to the resurrection. Even if it 
were certain that the expression was used by the 
apostle, to denote a solar or natural day, held sacred 
in commemoration of some particular event in Christ's 
history, it is difficult to see any sufficient reason for 
supposing that it must refer to the day of Christ's 
resurrection, more than to the day of his birth, or the 
day of his death, or the day on which he ascended 
into heaven, or the day on which the Holy Spirit 
descended on the church. 

The words ^'1 was in the spirit on the Lord's day," 
have frequently been interpreted as signifying that 
John was in a spiritual, or peculiarly devotional frame 
of mind, on that day. The apostle, however, it is 
deserving of notice, does not in the original, say that 
he was in the spirit, but simply in spirit. The inser- 
tion of the definite article in the EngUsh version, 
alters, materially, the natural sense of the expression 
as it appears in the Greek. John, it is to be remem- 
bered, had received a supernatural vision relative to 



104 

the events that were shortly to befal Christ's king- 
dom. Now, viewed in connexion with this context, 
it seems natural to suppose, that the words may have 
been used to denote, not the particular day on which 
John saw the vision, but the subject of the vision 
itself. '' Izvas in spirit^' and received a revelation re- 
lating to the day of the Lord. The term day, it is well 
known, is used in the scriptures, not only to signify 
the particular day on which a person is speaking or 
writing, but likewise any indefinite time, and fre- 
quently a whole religious age or dispensation. Thus 
the christian dispensation is frequently called the ''^ lat- 
ter days." In the Old Testament, ^' the day of the 
Lord" is often used to signify some illustrious ap- 
pearance of God, in a way of judgment or mercy. 
In the first epistle to the Thessalonians, the day of 
judgment is called the Lord's day.^ Considering 
then the particular scope of the context, it seems not 
improbable, that the expression in the Apocalypse 
may have been used in a similar extended sense. This 
conjecture, (and we offer it as nothing more than a 
conjecture,) appears to receive some support from 
the recurrence of the words in the fourth chapter, 
when the contents of the vision are about to be dis- 
closed. " After this I looked, and behold ! a door 
was opened in heaven : — and the voice which I heard 
at first, like a trumpet speaking to me, said, ' Come 

'^ H rjfxepa Kvpiov. 



105 



up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be 
hereafter.' And immediately / was in spirit, and 
behold a throne was set in heaven. """ 

Whether or not, however, there be any sufficient 
grounds for entertaining this view of the passage, 
there certainly seems to exist no sufficient reason for 
construing the single occurrence of an expression 
like this, of confessedly dubious import, into the 
promulgation of a divine precept. Admitting that 
it could be satisfactorily ascertained that it was upon 
a Sunday that John received this revelation of Jesus 
Christ, concerning the things which were shortly to 
come to pass, surely a circumstance of this extraor- 
dinary nature, cannot wath propriety be regarded as 
constituting an authoritative precedent, binding on 
Christ's follow^ers. If the observance of any religious 
festival had formed a part of the things which Christ 
commanded, it is reasonable to expect, that the ordi- 
nation of the institution, its duration, and the proper 
manner of keeping it, would have been distinctly 
recorded for the government of his disciples in 
every age of the world. Supposing, for a moment, 
that John did refer to some religious festival, we are 
no where informed on w^hat day of the week the insti- 
tution is to be observed, whether it recurs weekly, or 
monthly, or annually, or what duties its proper 
observance implies. 

The Apocalypse, on account of the obscure nature 

' Rev. iv. 1-2. 



106 



of its contents, was kept during the three first centu- 
ries, separate from the other books of the New 
Testament, and was seldom or ever read in the 
public assemblies of the church. The book is not 
mentioned in the catalogue of canonical books formed 
by Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, (A. D. 340.) nor in 
that formed by the council of Laodicea, (A. D. 364.) 
it is omitted also, in one or two other catalogues of 
the scriptural canon. This omission was not owing, 
it is generally supposed, to any suspicion being 
entertained of its authenticity or genuineness, but 
because its mysterious nature rendered it, in the 
view of the early christians, unsuitable for general 
perusal.^ When these and other circumstances are 
kept in view, we conceive, that whatever may have 
been the precise meaning of the phrase " the Lord's 
day," as originally used by the apostle, it must, to 
every dispassionate inquirer, appear altogether in- 
credible, that the single occurrence of it in this 
obscure, and seldom consulted symbolical prophecy, 
was designed to constitute the ground of a positive 
duty of universal and perpetual obligation. At all 
events, it is not to be controverted, that there is not 
the shadow of scriptural proof of any connexion 
having been instituted between the law of the sab- 
bath and any sacred day, or festival, of any name 
whatever, under the Gospel. The adoption of a 

« Bishop Tomline's Christian Theology, cited by Home. Vol, iv.484. 



107 

weekly religious festival, in the second and third 
centuries, furnishes no legitimate authority for trans- 
ferring the prescriptions of the Judaical decalogue, 
to the first day of the week, or for sabbatizing on 
that day — a practice which, as will afterwards be 
shown, was uniformly condemned by those who 
introduced the festival in question. 

That the custom of holding the stated meetings 
of the church on the first day of the week, obtained 
at an early period, is matter of history ; and it is 
also certain, that this day was, at a very early date, 
celebrated as a religious festival, and came, ulti- 
mately, to be generally known by the designation 
"Lord's day." How soon the custom obtained of 
observing Sunday in commemoration of Christ's 
resurrection, it is difficult precisely to determine ; 
but this much is certain, that there exists no evi- 
dence of any one during either the first or second cen- 
tury having kept that day as a holy sabbath. It is de- 
serving of notice also, that in adopting the custom of 
celebrating the day as a season of religious rejoicing, 
it was by no one at that time contended, that the prac- 
tice was obligatory, on the ground of an apostolic pre- 
cept enjoining it, neither was the origin of the name 
Lord's day ascribed to the occurrence of this expression 
in the Apocalypse.* In the writings of the fathers who 



* By some writers, it has been supposed that the first day of the week was 
known by the designation " the Lord's day," previous to the introduction of 



108 

flourished in the second century, the first day is sel- 
dom or ever called the Lord's day."" Justin calls it 
'^the day of the sun/' without intimating that it 
ought to receive any other name : Tertullian, who 
wrote about fifty years later, gives it the same name, 
(dies solis,) *' It is very likely" says a writer who 
has professedly examined this question, "that the 
more solemn and public use of the word Lord's day, 
was not observed till about the time of Sylvester IL 
when by Constan tine's command it became an injunc- 
tion. It w^as afterwards more generally noted in 
conversation and writing, religious and civil. Till 



the gospel, and that the name had its origin in the circumstance of Sunday 
having been dedicated by the heathens, to the honour of the sun. As the sun 
was called Dominus Sol, it has been inferred, that the day dedicated to his 
honour, was, in the same way called Dies Dominica. In support of this opinion, 
it has been advanced, that the Persians called their god Mithra^ (who, it is well 
known was nothing but the sun,) the Lord Mithra : that the Syrians called the 
sun by the e'^iihei Adonis, or Lord: that Porphyry to the same purpose, in his 
prayer addressed to the sun, calls him Dominus Sol : that in the consecration of 
the seven days of the week to the different planets, the day of the sun is called 
the day of the Lord Sol, or Dies Dominica, while the others are called by their 
simple names, as Dies Martis &c : and, in fine, that every one of the ancient 
nations, gave the sun the epithet Lord or Master, or some title equivalent to it, 
as Kurios in Greek, and Dominicus in Latin. See, on this subject, Higgin's 
Horse Sabbaticse. Dupuis sur tous les cultes. — Vol. iii. p. 41. 

a In the epistle, ascribed to Barnabas, Sunday is called " the eighth day." 
There is an expression used by Ignatius, that has usually been supposed to refer 
to the Lord's day, kurialie, that is, "the Lord's," without the addition of the 
word day. There is little importance to be attached to the occurrence of any 
single word, in epistles so grossly interpolated as those of this Father. Of all 
the ancient writings, it is now, on all hands, admitted, none have been more the 
subject of fraud and corruption than these. 



109 

the time of that emperor, and that prelate, it had 
never commenced in ecclesiastical constitution. This 
agrees with the notion of the present church, (of 
England,) looking on it as a very decent and lauda- 
ble custom, yet still a custom, continued from 
universal tradition, and not a divine ordinance^ 
During the third and fourth centuries, the day 
appears to have been simply regarded as one of the 
numerous fast and festival days, which the christians 
of those times adopted from considerations of sup- 
posed expediency ; and its observance was, with 
them, recommended on no other ground than the 
authority then claimed by the ecclesiastical rulers, to 
appoint observances of this nature. That this was 
the case, has been admitted by some of the most 
learned advocates of the Lord's day, who, while they 
maintain, that it is still a duty to observe the institu- 
tion, have possessed too correct a knowledge of its 
origin to allow them to attempt to claim for it an 
obligation on the ground of scriptural precept or ex- 
ample. " The Lord's day," says Dr. Peter Heylin, 
'^was not instituted by our Saviour Christ, com- 
manded by the apostles, or ordained first by any 
other authority than the voluntary consecration of it 
to religious uses : and being consecrated to these 
uses, was not advanced to that esteem which it now 
enjoys, but leisurely and by degrees, partly by canons 

Morer's Dialogues on the Lord's day. p. 57. 



no 

of particular councils^ and partly by the decretals of 
several popes, and orders of several inferior prelates, 
and being so advanced, is subject still to the autho- 
rity of the church, to be retained or changed as the 
church thinks fit."^ Those who continue to observe 
this weekly festival, and, w'ho with Heylin, recognize 
that authority, assumed and exercised during the 
first centuries, by the rulers of the church, in which 
it apparently had its origin, must be allowed to 
possess a claim to consistency, whatever may be 
thought of their adherence to the principles of 
protestantism. It appears to be very inconsistent, 
however, to recognize the authority of '^ the church" 
in this instance, while we refuse to receive various 
other ancient usages, which it is certain were obser- 
ved by the first christians at the same period, with 
no less solemnity. As early as TertuUian's time, the 
feast of Easter appears to have been an established 
practice. " We celebrate Easter," says he, '' in the 
first month of every year."^ It is certain also, that 
the custom of observing Whitsunday, Christmas, and 
various other feasts and festivals, obtained at a period 
not much later. Along wdth these, there were obser- 
ved numerous fasts, both fixed and occasional, some 
weekly, and others annual ; all of which were ordain- 
ed by the ecclesiastical rulers, w^ho, it is well known, 
made laws of this kind, at their own discretion. The 

^' Pascha celebramus anno circulo in mense primo. — De jejun. 
' Preface to the History of the Sabbath. 



Ill 

recognition of the authority exercised by the 
church at that time^ is evidently the only tena- 
ble ground on which the retention of such usages 
can ever consistently be maintained ; and surely if 
we admit one usage on this ground^ we are bound to 
admit all ; for all necessarily stand or fall together. 
" It will not be found in scripture" said Charles I. 
to " the new reformers" in his reign, w'ho were then 
zealously propagating their Judaical doctrine of 
the modern sabbath, ^^ where Saturday is discharged 
to be kept, or turned into Sunday ; wherefore it 
must be the church's authority that changed the one 
and instituted the other. Wherefore, my opinion is, 
that those who will not keep the feast of Easter, may 
as well return to the observation of Saturday, and 
refuse the weekly Sunday. When any one can shew 
me that herein I am in an error, I shall not be 
ashamed to confess and amend it.''^ On the princi- 
ples professed by those W'hose notions he w^as contro- 
verting, this argument made use of by the unfortu- 
nate monarch, appears to admit of no satisfactory 
answer. If the scriptures be recognized as the only 
rule of faith and obedience, to be consistent, wt are 
obviously bound to reject every religious custom un- 
authorized by the apostles. The Lord's day is only 
one of a vast number of religious customs introduced 
by the ecclesiastical authorities, during the first three 

' See Morer. — p. 58. 



112 

centuries : if it is to be retained, it will be difficult 
to assign any valid reason for rejecting the rest. 

As the Apostles of Christ have been constituted 
the sole authoritative teachers of christian duty, our 
concern, it is obvious, is not with the religious 
customs that were appended to Christianity in the 
second, third, and fourth centuries, but with the com- 
mandments that were delivered to those who acted 
under apostolic direction. Recognizing the New 
Testament writings as the sole attested rule of 
christian obedience, the question which we have to 
ascertain, is simply this : — does there exist any 
divine law, requiring the sanctification of a determi- 
nate portion of time under the gospel, or is there any 
precedent on record, that implies an obligation on 
christians to meet for christian purposes at any par- 
ticular stated time ? Of the existence of an express 
precept, or authoritative precedent, implying either 
of these obligations, we own, we are unable to dis- 
cover any adequate evidence in the sacred volume ; 
and it is certain, that where there is no law, there 
can be no transgression. 

There are two different obligations which it is 
conceivable, may have arisen from scriptural ex- 
ample that have frequently been confounded, and 
which it is very desirable should be considered 
separately, being in their nature very distinct. 
There might have existed an obligation to separate 
a weekly or any other portion of time from a com- 



113 

mon to a sacred use : this would have been the case 
if there had been any evidence of the first behevers 
having been taught to observe the prescriptions of 
the fourth commandment, as a part of their christian 
duty. There might also have existed an obligation to 
meet hebdomadally, or statedly, at any certain recur- 
ring hour or day. A law prescribing this latter practice 
might have been delivered, it is obvious, unaccompa- 
nied by any sabbatical injunction ; and it is certain, 
that if there exists any proof of such a law having 
been promulgated, the same precept which the first 
christians observed must continue still in force. 

Of the former of these supposed obhgations we have 
already treated at large. It has been shown, we trust, 
that the perpetual obligation of one of the positive 
precepts of the abrogated economy of Moses, is a 
notion at variance with all the leading facts recorded 
in sacred history, and with the general scope of the 
apostolic writings. That the national law of the 
sabbath should have been separated from the other 
laws of the Jewish government, and imposed on the 
christian converts, appears to be a supposition, alike 
extravagant and improbable : and it seems not less 
so to imagine, that it was designed that the fourth 
commandment should retain its obligation under the 
christian dispensation, while there was no intimation 
to be recorded of it being excepted from that abro- 
gated economy, with which it was incorporated, and 
from which, the christian converts were declared to be 

Q 



114 

wholly exempted. It appears utterly incredible, that 
a religious observance like that of a weekly sabbath, 
which affects so materially the extent of christian 
obedience, in every age of the world, should have 
been nowhere recorded, either in the form of a pre- 
cept or an example, if it had really formed a part of 
the things which Christ commanded. 

The question, whether christians are bound to 
meet hebdomadally, we now propose shortly to con- 
sider. As it is on record that the early christians 
met on one occasion at least, for christian purposes, 
on the first day of the week, and, as it is certain 
that the practice of meeting statedly on that day 
prevailed at a very early date, it has usually been 
inferred, that these facts imply an obligation on 
christians to continue the same practice in every age 
of the world. In one view, we have no hesitation 
in acquiescing in this conclusion. It is manifest, 
that this custom has long been found highly expe- 
dient ; that, so long as this remains the case, the 
practice must continue to be, in a certain sense 
obligatory, no one, we apprehend, will seek to 
deny. It is to be remembered, however, that if 
there exists no law upon the subject, the custom, 
though obligatory as a matter of expediency, is obli- 
gatory on no other ground. The matter then resolves 
itself into this query. Does the scriptural example 
on record imply the existence of any law upon 
the subject ? 



115 

It is of importance to bear in mind, throughout 
every inquiry in which the obligations arising from 
the example of the first christians is involved, that it 
is not every thing they did that constitutes an autho- 
ritative precedent, but only that part of their prac- 
tice, which we can ascertain was the result of obedi- 
ence to a divine precept. The will of Christ is the 
sole rule of christian duty ; and what that will is, we 
learn from the precepts and examples recorded in 
the New Testament. That every express precept is 
of perpetual obligation, is certain : it will be, by 
few, contended however, that every example which 
the scriptures mention, is necessarily of an authori- 
tative nature. If any recorded practice of the early 
christians is so situated, that it furnishes no evidence 
of the existence of a divine law ; if the practice can 
be ascertained to have naturally arisen from circum- 
stances that would have led to this result, indepen- 
dent of any apostolic precept, the example of the 
New Testament believers, is evidently, of no autho- 
rity whatever ; inasmuch as it furnishes no indication 
of the authoritative will of the sole lawgiver in the 
kingdom of heaven. His will it is, which constitutes 
the rule of perpetual obedience to his people, 
and not every thing which the first christians did 
and said. 

That the early christians should have adopted the 
practice of meeting periodically at a certain hour 
and day, was, we think, naturally to have been ex- 



116 

pected, and though it is by no means certain^ it is 
certainly quite possible^ that the custom of meeting 
statedly on the first day of the week, obtained 
during New Testament times. There were various 
considerations, indeed, which all agreed in pointing 
out this as the most suitable time on which they could 
all regularly assemble together for christian worship. 
The public weekly sabbath in Judea, (which, it is to 
be kept in mind, was then observed by all the Jewish 
believers,) commenced on our Friday evening, at 
six o'clock, and ended at the same hour on the fol- 
lowing day ; so that the beginning of their first day 
of the week corresponded with our Saturday evening. 
This interval between the close of the sabbath and 
the commencement of the next solar day, would thus 
very naturally offer itself as, in various respects, the 
most convenient time for the early believers, both 
Jewish and Gentile, meeting together for christian 
purposes. 

It seems to have been during this interval, that 
the meeting at Troas took place. We are told, that 
the disciples resident there came together on the 
first day of the week to break bread, and Paul 
preached unto them ready to depart on the morrow. 
The meeting, it appears, was continued during the 
night, '''even to break of day." That the night 
during which the meeting lasted was that of Satur- 
day, seems certain ; for had it been on the night 
following, the meeting would have been held on the 



117 

second day of the week, and not on the first. Paul 
appears to have staid at Troas over the sabbath, and 
to have gone to the christian meeting ready to de- 
part on the morrow : and having continued with the 
disciples during the whole of the night, (^^ having 
talked with them a long while, even till the break of 
day,") he departed on his travels, early on the Sunday 
morning. 

It thus seems highly probable, that the meeting 
mentioned in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, 
(the only proper example of a christian meeting 
on the first day on record,) ended before our 
Sunday dawned. When it is remembered, that 
the greater part of the Gentile converts were at 
that time placed in circumstances which precluded 
their assembling regularly during the day time, on 
any one day of the week, it must appear extremely 
natural, that the interval betw^een the close of 
the sabbath, and the beginning of the next solar 
day, should have been fixed upon, as the most 
suitable time for all parties statedly assembling 
for the purposes of instruction and divine wor- 
ship. When a custom of this kind is once es- 
tablished, it is seldom departed from, without the 
occurrence of some urgent reason for superseding it 
by some other. It is matter of history, that the 
practice of meeting in an evening and in the night 
time, continued to prevail during the greater part of 
the second century. Pliny the younger, who was 



118 

governor of Bithynia^ (A. D. 107,) states in his 
letter to Trajan, that the followers of Christ, whom 
by torture he had induced to abandon the profession 
they had made of the gospel, gave this account of 
their renounced religion. " They were accustomed 
on a stated day to meet before daylight, and to re- 
peat among themselves a hymn to Christ as to God." 
Justin's account, about forty years later, of the prac- 
tice existing in his time, is not materially different. 
" On the day called the day of sun, there is a meet- 
ing in one place, of all the christians who live either 
in the towns or in the country." There are abundant 
testimonies of the same custom having been uninter- 
ruptedly transmitted to succeeding ages, as well as 
of the day coming ultimately to be known by the de- 
signation the Lord's day. In all the notices that 
occur, however, of this practice, and even long sub- 
sequent to the time when the first day became 
generally observed as a religious festival, there has no 
case been hitherto pointed out, in which it is ex- 
pressed or implied that the practice was founded on 
an apostolic precept. 

We conceive then, that though it is on record that 
the christians at Troas met on one occasion on the 
first day of the week ; and although there is sufficient 
evidence that the practice of meeting statedly at that 
time became general, before the close of the second 
century, we are still unfurnished with any proof of the 
existence of a divine law upon the subject. Whether 



119 

the meeting at Troas was held during a Saturday or 
a Sunday night, is a point very immaterial to the only 
question with which we are concerned. There are 
various meetings mentioned as having taken place on 
other days of the week, but in no case is it implied 
that the early believers met on a stated day, in obedi- 
ence to a positive precept enjoining such a practice. 
Adequate evidence of the existence of a precept of 
this kind, is plainly the sole authority that christians 
are now warranted in recognizing as a divine law of 
perpetual obligation. 

The early christians, doubtless, found it on various 
accounts expedient to meet on stated occasions for 
christian worship : and so must ever their successors 
do in every age of the church. Christians are ex- 
pressly enjoined not to forsake the assembling of 
themselves together, but they are nowhere directed 
to meet statedly at any one time more particu- 
larly than another. Apart from any injunction to 
meet frequently, it is manifest, that the watchful- 
ness and fraternal affection they are exhorted mutually 
to exercise over, and towards each other, imply an 
obligation to maintain such a constant inter- 
course, as may be adequate for attaining the impor- 
tant ends for which christian association has, in divine 
wisdom, been appointed. As no positive law how- 
ever, has been delivered, prescribing how often they 
ought to meet, it behoves them, in the exercise of 
true allegiance to their only master, in this as in 



120 

other matters, to stand fast in the Uberty wherewith 
Christ has made them free, and to guard against the 
credulous and unmanly adoption of doctrines and 
commandments of human invention. On various 
accounts, it is obviously highly expedient at present, 
for christians to hold their stated meetings on the 
first day of the week ; and it is indubitable, that 
viewed in this light, so long as the practice remains 
expedient, it must be their duty to continue it. 



SECTION IV. 

On the views entertained of the first day of the 
week, during the first ages of the christian 
church ; and on the causes which led to the 
general adoption of the modern sabbatarian 
doctrine in england, during the seventeenth 

CENTURY. 

When we leave the testimony of the inspired writers, 
and pass forward to the unauthoritative records of 
the times succeeding the age of the apostles, we still 
search in vain for any footsteps of the doctrine, that 
" ever since the resurrection of Christ, God has ap- 
pointed the first day of the week to be the weekly 
sabbath." According, however, to the assumptions 
which it is usual for the advocates of this doctrine 
to make, the opinions which prevail at present upon 
the subject, have prevailed in every period since the 
first introduction of Christianity. 

This notion, however undoubtingly in some quar- 
ters entertained, appears to derive little support from 
the testimony of early antiquity: so far indeed, as we 
have hitherto been able to discover, it has no better 
foundation than a misconception of the nature and 

R 



122 

design of certain religious customs that obtained 
during the second and third centuries. That Sunday 
was observed as a day of religious rejoicing, as early 
as the time of Tertullian, is abundantly manifest. 
Owing to the early prevalence of this religious 
custom, and to the festival having been converted, 
fifteen centuries afterwards, into a w^eekly sabbath, 
two things are now by many confounded, which have 
no necessary connexion or natural resemblance, 
namely, a day separated to God's exclusive service, 
and strictly devoted to religious engagements, in the 
manner the seventh day was observed by the Jewish 
people ; and the custom of observing certain days as 
seasons of relaxation and religious rejoicing, a prac- 
tice which, it is well known, became common in the 
christian church at a very early period, and which 
has continued to prevail in the Greek and Latin 
churches unto the present day. These festivals, it 
is to be observed, were at no time viewed as having 
any analogy with the sabbatical law promulgated to 
the Jewish nation, but, on the contrary, were usually 
contrasted with it, on account of its rigorous pre- 
scriptions being regarded as direotly opposed to 
them in nature. Instead, indeed, of being sancti- 
fied by a holy resting from the usual avocations of 
life, all fasting, and even an abstinence from ordina- 
ry amusements during the celebration of such seasons, 
was commonly reprehended, and sometimes strictly 
forbidden. Tertullian, for instance, declares it '^ to 



123 

be unlawful to fast, or to worship on the knees on a 
Sunday ,"^ and describes the christians of his time as 
'' indulging themselves on that day, in mirth and fes- 
tivity." '^Thus too, it is stated in the epistle ascribed 
to Barnabas, '' we keep the eighth day with gladness." 
In adopting this and numerous other festivals, some 
fixed, and others occasional, it does not appear, as 
has already been remarked, that the christians of 
those times considered there was any scriptural 
injunction, making it imperative on them to do so. 
At that period, the rulers of the christian body 
appointed whatever new religious practice they 
deemed expedient, and the people seem to have been 
uniformly ready and willing to fall in with the 
observance of them. 

The traditional power virtually claimed by the 
rulers of the church, during the first centuries, it is 
to be remembered, was by no one, at that time, 
denied, or even called in question. It is very neces- 
sary to keep this circumstance in recollection, in 
order to estimate correctly the importance which is to 
be attached to the testimony of every writer during 
the second, third, and fourth centuries. During 
these centuries, the chief corruptions of popery were 
either, as an able writer upon this subject has remark- 
ed, introduced in principle, or the seeds of them so 

** Die Dominico jejunare nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. 

De Cor. Mil. 

^que si diem solis Isetitise indulgeraus. Apologet xvi, p. 16, B. 



124 

effectually sown^ as naturally to produce those 
baneful fruits which appeared so plentifully at a 
later period. In Justin Martyr's time, within fifty 
years of the apostolic age^ the cup was mixed with 
water^ and a portion of the elements sent to the 
absent. The bread, which at first was sent only to 
the sick, was, in the time of Tertullian and Cyprian, 
carried home by the people, and locked up as a divine 
treasure for their private use. At this time too, the 
ordinance of the Supper was given in all the public 
communions to infants of the tenderest age, and was 
styled, the sacrifice of the body of Christ. The cus- 
tom of praying for the dead, Tertullian states, was 
common in the second century, and became the 
universal practice of the foliomng ages ; so that it 
came in the fourth century, to be reckoned a kind of 
heresy to deny the efficacy of it. By this time, the 
invocation of saints, the superstitious use of images, 
of the sign of the cross, and of consecrated oil, were 
become established practices, and pretended miracles 
confidently adduced in proof of their supposed 
efficacy.'* 

Thus did that " mystery of iniquity"^ which was 
" already working" in the time of the apostles, 
speedily after their departure, spread its corruptions 
among the professors of Christianity. By inducing 

^ See Middleton's Introductory Discourse to his Free Enquiry, where the origi- 
nal passages on which the above statements are founded, will be found cited. 
^ II. Thessalonians ii. 7-12. 



125 

them to adopt names of religious distinction^ and to 
establish among the subjects of that kingdom, all the 
members of which its founder had declared, stand 
upon a perfect equality/ various degrees of ecclesi- 
astical rank and dignity, a right to legislate for 
Christ's people in matters of discipline and worship, 
was ultimately assumed and exercised without either 
fear or control. To ambitious men, new and nume- 
rous enticements were thus created " to lord it over 
God's heritage ;" and in the exercise of their usurped 
authority, these exalted ecclesiastics were but too 
successfully educating themselves for introducing, at 
a future period, the antichristian power ^^ with all de- 
ceivableness of unrighteousness," and in all its full and 
imposing splendour.^ As this spirit of innovation and 

•"See Luke sxii. 24-26 and Mat. xxiii. 3-12. 
' s It was not until a form of Christianity %vas adopted as the state religion of 
the Roman empire, that this mystery of iniquity (" that wicked one, whon* 
the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the 
brightness of his coming,") was fully revealed. Prior to that period, there were 
various causes that kept it in check, and hindered the disclosure of its true 
character and malignant influence. "When these causes were taken out of the 
way, Antichrist, (the man of sin,) in the form of the love and assumption of 
spiritual power, speedily made his way through the various gradations of 
ecclesiastical ambition, converting, in his progress, the kingdom of Christ into a 
secular kingdom, fitted for the ends of clerical rule and rapacity, until, step by 
step, he ultimately reached the throne of the papal hierarchy. 

Under the pretence of christianizing Pagans, Christianity itself was, in a short 
time, paganized, and the foundations laid of a system of wide-spread spiritual 
tyranny and delusion, under which, in various modified shapes, the spiritual 
interests of mankind have ever since been struggling. 

To that usurpation of a right to legislate for Christ's subjects, which is the 
unfailing and distinguishing mark of the antichristian power, under every 



126 

unchristian ambition made its appearance in the 
age immediately succeeding that of the apostles, 
there is, obviously, little importance to be attached 
to the testimony of the earliest uninspired writers, as 
it respects our interpretation of the rule of christian 
duty. So early as the middle of the second century, 
the ordinances of the gospel, it appears, had not been 
allowed to remain unpolluted by human tradition ; 
and even then, various inventions of men had been 
added to the doctrines and commandments of Christ, 
as recorded in the apostolic writings. 

The usages of early antiquity are, nevertheless, 
matter of much interest, and as they frequently 
serve to throw some light on New Testament times, 
their testimony is not undeserving of conside- 
ration. It is only, indeed as furnishing some degree 
of presumptive evidence, in proof or disproof of any 
particular interpretation of scripture, that we con- 
ceive, they merit regard in any inquiry into the 
attested rule of christian obedience. When viewed 
correctly in this light, there is much less importance 

form; to that "love of pre-eminence" (the seminal principle of all unchristian 
usurpation) which betrayed its existence in the apostolic age, and which now 
is not unfrequently to be met with, in powerful operation, in the heart of not 
a few professedly independent christian societies ; and to that blending, in 
religious fellowship, of the subjects of Christ's kingdom, with the men of this 
world, which has necessarily followed from the unnatural unions formed between 
Christianity and civil governments, are to be attributed, we apprehend, either 
directly or indirectly, the whole countless multitude of errors in doctrine, and 
corruptions in discipline, with which the christian religion has hitherto been so 
grievously overspread. 



1-27 

we apprehend, to be attached to ascertaining the ex- 
istence of any ancient usage, than to ascertaining the 
contrary ; we mean, the one is, by no means, so cer- 
tain a test of the divine origin of any religious prac- 
tice, as the other is of its unscriptural character and 
authority. Chargeable as the first christians unques- 
tionably were, with a credulous recognition of human 
inventions, they cannot justly be accused of readily 
relinquishing any religious custom, they at any time 
adopted : on the contrary, whenever any usage once 
obtained a place in the traditions of the church, it 
was uniformly, without any regard to its origin, 
treated with a superstitious veneration, and religious- 
ly transmitted to posterity as of indispensable obliga- 
tion. Although then, the existence of a religious 
custom in the second century is no decisive evidence 
of its apostolic origin, it is difficult to conceive that 
any important religious observance should have pre- 
vailed in the times of the apostles, without some trace 
of it being found in the next and following genera- 
tions. If the doctrine, for instance, of the transfe- 
rence to the first day of the week, of the duties of 
the fourth commandment, had been taught by the 
apostles, we should naturally expect to find some re- 
cognition of these duties in the records of christian 
antiquity. It is surely very improbable, that a 
weekly observance like this, which interferes so much 
with the usual arrangements of domestic life, should 
have been established by the apostles, and wholly 



128 

relinquished before the close of the second century. 
Now whether or not it was taught by the apostles, so 
it is, that of the existence of this Sabbatarian doc- 
trine, or of the recognition of its duties, there remains 
no trace in the pages of early ecclesiastical history. 
In proof of this statement we now propose to adduce 
a few unquestionable authorities and historical facts, 
illustrative of the opinions of early antiquity upon 
the subject. 

In the writings of the Fathers, (as they are called,) 
who flourished in the second century, there is no 
indication of Sunday being viewed by any one at 
that time, in the light of a holy sabbath. The ac- 
count given by Justin (who wrote A. D. 150) of the 
social meetings and practices of the christians of his 
time, is thus translated by Dr. Kaye. ^^ Afterwards 
we remind each other of these things, and they who 
are wealthy assist those who are in need, and we are 
always together, and over all our offerings we bless 
the Creator of all things, through his Son Jesus 
Christ, and through the Holy Spirit. And on the 
day called Sunday, there is an assembling together of 
all who dwell in the cities and countrv; and the 
memoirs of the apostles, and the writings of the 
prophets, are read as long as circumstances permit. 
Then, when the reader has ceased, the president 
delivers a discourse, in which he admonishes and 
exhorts (all present) to the imitation of those good 
things. Then we all rise together, and pray : and 



129 

as we before said, prayer being ended, bread and 
wine and water are brought, and the president 
offers prayers in hke manner, and thanksgivings, 
according to his abihty, and the people express their 
assent by saying Amen : and the distribution of that, 
over which the thanksgiving has been pronounced, 
takes place to each, and each partakes, and a portion 
is sent to the absent by the deacons. . . . But we meet 
together on Sunday because it is the first day, in 
which, God having wrought the necessary change in 
darkness and matter, made the world : and on this day 
Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the dead. For he 
was crucified on the day before that of Saturn ; and 
on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of 
the Sun, having appeared to the apostles and 
disciples, he taught them the things which we now 
submit to your consideration."^ It appears from 
this passage, that the intercourse of christians among 
each other, continued, in Justin's time to be very 
great — they were ^* always together." Their prin- 
cipal convocation for christian purposes, seems to 
have been held on Sunday ; and the reason assigned 
for selecting this day is, that on it, God began the 
work of creation, and Christ rose from the dead. 
There is no mention, it is to be observed, of the 
transference of the sabbath from the seventh day 
to the first, or of the sanctification of the latter day, in 
obedience to the prescriptions of the decalogue. 

*■ Bishop of Lincoln's Account of the Lif€ and Writings of Justin Martyr. — p. 48, 

S 



130 

"If to this account from Justin/' says an able writer^ 
referring to this passage^ '' we add, from TertuUian, 
that Sunday was dedicated to joy, that it was ob- 
served as a day of festivity, we shall have collected 
all the information upon the subject which the 
Fathers of the second century afford. Their writings 
supply not the slightest information that the Lord's 
day was observed by them in obedience to any posi- 
tive divine precept enjoining it, or that the observance 
of the seventh day, or of one day in seven, was en- 
joined to our first parents, and through them to all 
mankind : or, that the sabbatical institutions of the 
Mosaic law were of any force at all in the christian 
church. But they furnish abundant proofs of the 
opinion, that the institution of the sabbath was given 
to the Jews only ; that it was not observed by the 
Patriarchs before the law ; that it was utterly abro- 
gated, together with the other ceremonial appoint- 
ments of the law, by the introduction of the new 
and better covenant : and, that the observance of it 
indicated a reprehensible desire of returning from 
Christianity to Judaism.'" 

There are various ecclesiastical decrees recorded 
in the early historians, recommending the observance 
of Sunday as a religious festival, but in no case that 
has hitherto been pointed out, is this injunction en- 
forced by any reference to scriptural authority : on 
the contrary, it is manifest from several of these 

i British Critic, — Vol. vi. p. 183. 



131 

decrees, that the observance of the day was not view- 
ed, at the period they were issued, as having any de- 
pendance on the decalogue, or as bearing, in any way, 
a resemblance to the rigorous prescriptions of the 
Jewish sabbath. By a decree of the council of 
Gangres in Paphlagonia, (A. D. 357,) all those 
are anathematized, who, from notions of devotion, 
pass the Sunday in bodily mortification and fasting. 
The practice of abstaining from secular employments 
on the first day of the week, was condemned by the 
council of Laodicea (A. D. 364,) as judaizing.^ In 
the edict of Constantine,^ which established the ob- 
servance of this festival to be the municipal law of 
the Roman empire, while all judges, townspeople, 
and "the occupations of all trades," are enjoined to 
rest " on the venerable day of the Sun," all persons 
on the other hand, employed in agriculture, are de- 
clared to be at full liberty to continue their labours, 
whenever their affairs might require them to do so. 
It is obvious that there is nothing in this edict which 
implies that the observance it enjoins, was regarded 
as deriving its obligation from a scriptural precept, 
which it is natural to expect would have been the 
case, if this opinion had at that period prevailed : 

See Suiceri Thess. Ecclesiast. voce Sabbaton. 

Omnes judices, urbanaeque plebes, et cunctarum artium officia venerabili 

die solis quiescant. Ruri taraen positi agrorum culturae libere licenterque inser- 

viant ; quoniam frequenter evenit, ut non aptius alio die frumenta sulcis aut 

vienese scrobibus mandentur, ne occasione raomenti pereat, commoditas coelesti 

provisione concessa. Daf. Nonis Mart. Crispo II. et Constantino II. Conss. 

Corp. Jur. Cir. Codicis lib 3 tit 12. 



132 

regulation appears to have been adopted, purely 
from considerations of existing expediency, and to 
have been enforced on no other grounds. 

After the promulgation of this decree, the obser- 
vance of Sunday, as a religious festival, became im- 
mediately, very general; long subsequent to this 
period, however, the practice of intermitting public 
labour during the vy^hole of the day, does not appear 
to have been by any means universally established. 
It was very customary for the people, after the pub- 
lic services of religion were concluded, to resume 
their usual employments. " Paula, a devout lady in 
Jerome's time, is represented by him, after coming 
from church on the Lord's day, as sitting down 
with the virgins and widows attending her, to 
their daily tasks, which consisted in making gar- 
ments ; and as doing this on that day for themselves, 
as well as for others that needed them. By this 
time, Christianity had got into the throne as well as 
into the empire. Yet, for all this, the entire sancti- 
fication of the Lord's day, proceeded slowly ; and, 
that it was the work of time to bring it to perfection 
appears from the several steps the church made in 
her constitution, and from the decrees of emperors 
and other princes, wherein the prohibitions from 
servile and civil business, advanced by degrees, from 
one species to another, till the day had got a consi- 
derable figure in the world.""" 

n. Morer on the Lord's Day. — ^p. 235, 236. 



133 

It is well known, that during the time of the 
heathen emperors, the christians held their meetings 
for divine worship, principally on the evening of the 
day : they were of course naturally led to adopt this 
custom, from the evening or night being the only 
time when the people were all disengaged from their 
ordinary employments. That the first christians did 
pursue their secular avocations on the first day of 
the week, is unquestionable, and indeed their doing 
so was, in a manner, unavoidable. Now, it is de- 
serving of notice, that although this was their con- 
stant practice, the necessity they were under to 
continue to labour, is never complained of as a hard- 
ship, neither is the practice ever reprehended by any 
of the early Fathers as a violation of any divine 
precept, which it is natural to think they would 
frequently have done, if the sanctification of Sunday 
by a holy resting from all the business of life, had 
been recognized at that time, as a christian obliga- 
tion. The necessity under which many of the fii'st 
christians were no doubt placed, to engage in secular 
employments on this day, does not at all serve to 
explain this circumstance ; for even after the time 
when Constantine issued his edict, when this necessity 
no longer existed, the practice of resuming the ordi- 
nary avocations of life, after the close of public wor- 
ship, appears to have been quite common, and to 
have been sanctioned by the Fathers of that age. 
This practice is countenanced by Jerome, by Chry- 



134 

sostom, by Augustine, by Gregory Magnus, and 
others, and is sometimes even recommended as a 
proper and laudable custom. 

It is matter of history, that there was a considera- 
ble number of the Jewish believers of the gospel, who, 
at the destruction of Jerusalem, refused to relinquish 
the Mosaic observances to which they had been 
accustomed : averse, apparently, to read aright that 
affecting lesson of Providence, they continued to 
retain their ancient Jewish usages, in conjunction 
with the profession of the gospel. Though it was 
the leading design of the apostle Paul in his epistle 
addressed to these Hebrews, to wean them from 
their natural attachment to their old Judaism ; and 
to lead them on to perfection in the knowledge of 
the gospel, by convincing them of the natural and 
appointed termination of the Mosaic economy, in the 
finished work of the Messiah ; notwithstanding too, 
they had long been in possession of the most pointed 
and affecting warnings of the fate that hung over their 
favourite city and temple, all these lessons of instruc- 
tion and admonition appear to have been lost upon 
their prej udiced minds. They continued still " zealous 
of the law," and jealous of every doctrine that appear- 
ed to disparage the importance of its institutions, or 
endanger in any way their perpetuity. While, how- 
ever, a proportion of these Jewish believers continued 
to labour under these Judaical prejudices and mis- 
conceptions, there was a considerable number of 



135 

them, who, when the principal cause of their blind- 
ness was removed, by the abolition of the temple ser- 
vice, shortly afterwards wholly relinquished the 
Jewish ritual, and incorporated themselves with their 
Gentile brethren. These were the true followers of 
the apostle, who by their conduct proved that they 
understood and had benefited by his instructions, 
and were ready accordingly, when the trial came, to 
act conformably to that change of circumstances, for 
the approach of which, it was the main design of his 
epistle to prepare their minds. 

The exact number of Jewish believers who acted 
in this manner, it is impossible now to ascertain. It 
is certain that a body of Hebrew Christians adhering 
to the Mosaic ritual, existed at Pella, until the final 
dispersion of the Jews from Jerusalem in the reign 
of Adrian. It is supposed, that at that period, the 
majority of this body finally relinquished their 
ancient customs, and were admitted, on doing so, 
into the immunities of the newly formed colony of 
Elia, from which all Jews were excluded. The 
residue who still persisted in their tenacity to the 
law of Moses, withdrew into that part of Palestine 
called Perea, and there established a peculiar church 
of their own, in which the ceremonial law was retain- 
ed in all its ancient rigour. The rites instituted by 
Moses, they maintained to be still obligatory on all 
christians of the Hebrew race ; those who were 



136 

of a different origin, they exempted from their 
obligation.'' 

Of those Hebrews who conformed to the regular 
order and discipline of the catholic body of believers, 
there appears to have been a considerable number 
who still continued to pay some regard to a few of 
the venerated practices of their ancestors. Of all 
their old usages, the weekly sabbath seems to have 
been that which these persons found the greatest 
difficulty in relinquishing. Through the influence 
of their example in continuing to pay a respect to 
the seventh day, and not improbably owing to their 
frequent justification of their conduct in doing so, 
and recommendation of the practice to others, the 
partial observance of the sabbath, ultimately be- 
came very general among several of the Eastern 
churches, in addition to, and in conjunction with, the 
celebration of the weekly festival of Sunday. In this 
way arose the ancient Sabbatarians, a body, it is well 
known, of very considerable importance in respect 
both to numbers and influence, during the greater 
part of the third and the early part of the next 
century. Socrates, the historian, states that with the 
exception of Rome and Alexandria, all other churches 

■ These Judaical christians, though inconsiderable as regarded numbers, 
were divided into two sects, the Nazaren^s and the Ebionites. Of these, the 
former appear to have been incomparably the more respectable. Both gradually 
dwindled into insignificance about the beginning of the fourth century. — See 
Mosheim's Commentaries, VidalVs Trans. Vol ii. p. 193. 



137 

devoted Saturday as well as Sunday to religious pur- 
poses. It was their practice to sabbatize on Satur- 
day, and to celebrate Sunday as a day of rejoicing 
and festivity. While, however, in some places, a 
respect was thus generally paid to both of these days, 
the judaizing practice of observing Saturday was, 
by the leading churches, expressly condemned, and all 
the doctrines connected wdth it, stedfastly resisted. 
Among the general body of believers, it seems to 
have been the prevailing doctrine, that the Mosaic 
institution was, as a whole, entirely abolished. In 
the writings of the earliest and most esteemed of the 
Fathers, the sabbath is uniformly spoken of as an 
integral part of the Jewish constitution. ^^All its 
ordinances," says Justin, " its sacrifices, its sabbath, 
the prohibitions of certain kinds of food, were design- 
ed to counteract the inveterate tendency of the Jews 
to fall into idolatry."" The view most generally 
taken of the sabbatical institution, by the christian 
writers of the two following centuries, seems to have 
been, that it was purely an ordinance of the Mosaic 
economy, which had been wholly superseded, having 
naturally terminated in the christian dispensation : 
they contended, that instead of being continued 
under the gospel, or transferred to any new day, it 
had been succeeded by the whole life of a christian 
believer, of the spiritual rest and holiness enjoyed by 
whom it had, under the law, been an appointed type. 

° Bishop of Lincoln's Justin Martyr. — p. 22. 

T 



138 

On the supposition of the prevalence during the 
third and fourth centuries of the modern Sabbatarian 
doctrine^ it seems altogether unaccountable, that 
when the protracted controversy which took place on 
this subject was going forward, no one thought of 
advancing the obvious and silencing argument, that 
if it were granted, that Sunday was the appointed 
substitute of the old sabbath, it necessarily followed, 
that the observance of the seventh day, was entirely 
superseded. It is natural to think, that if this doc- 
trine had been then recognized, it would, by both 
parties, have been regarded as forming the hinge on 
which the whole controversy turned. The question at 
issue at that time, how^ever, was plainly, not at all the 
religious character of the first day of the week : that 
its observance, as a festival of the church, was a lauda- 
ble custom, seems to have been on all hands admitted : 
the notion that its observance as a holy sabbath was 
obligatory in obedience to the prescriptions of the de- 
calogue, no one seems to have ever once broached. 
It is obvious, that the only day then known by the de- 
signation the sabbath, was Saturday, and the sole 
question in debate was, whether a respect ought still to 
be paid to it under the gospel. It is not to be doubted 
that had the modern notion of the transference of the 
weekly sabbath from the seventh day to the first, 
been entertained by the opponents of these ancient 
Sabbatarians, or had this doctrine been regarded, at 
that time, as capable of being maintained on scriptural 



139 

grounds, it would readily have been brought forward as 
an argument obviously conclusive of the whole contro- 
versy. The circumstance of this view of the subject 
having never been taken by any one, or adduced on 
either side as having any bearing on the question, 
furnishes an indication, we apprehend, of a very une- 
quivocal nature, that the christians of that age were 
total strangers to the modern doctrine. 

The Sabbatarian controversy appears to have been 
very little agitated subsequent to the close of the 
third century; and, very shortly after the period when 
Constantine issued his edict enjoining the general 
observance of Sunday throughout the Roman empire, 
the party that had contended for the observance of 
the seventh day, dwindled into insignificance. The ob- 
servance of Sunday as a public festival, during which 
all business, with the exception of rural employ- 
ments, was intermitted, came to be more and more 
generally established, ever after this time, through- 
out both the Greek and the Latin churches. 
There is no evidence, however, that either at this, 
or at a period much later, the observance was viewed 
as deriving any obligation from the fourth command- 
ment : it seems to have been regarded as an insti- 
tution corresponding in nature with Christmas, Good 
Friday, and other festivals of ^the church ; and, as 
resting, with them, on the grounds of ecclesiastical 
authority and tradition. " Thus do we see," says the 
learned Heylin, "upon what grounds the Lord's 



140 

day stands ; on custom firsts and voluntary consecra- 
tion of it to religious meetings : that custom conti- 
nued by the authority of the church of God, which 
tacitly approved the same ; and finally confirmed 
and ratified by christian princes throughout their 
empires." 

" It was left to God's people to pitch on the first 
day of the week, or any other, as the public use 
might require ; for there was no divine command 
that it particularly should be sanctified, as there 
was concerning the Jewish sabbath. And though 
this day was taken up and made a day of meeting in 
the congregation for religious exercises, yet for three 
hundred years there was neither law to bind them to 
it, nor any rest from labour, or from worldly business 
required upon it. And when it seemed good unto 
christian princes to lay restraints upon their people, 
yet at first it was not general, but only this, that 
certain men in certain places, should lay aside their 
ordinary works to attend to God's service in the 
church ; those engaged in employments that were 
most toilsome, and most repugnant to the true nature 
of a sabbath, being allowed to follow and pursue 
their labours, because most necessary to the common- 
wealth. And in following times, when the princes 
and prelates endeavoured to restrain them from that 
also, it was not brought about without much strug- 
gling and opposition of the people ; more than a 
thousand years being past, after Christ's ascension. 



141 

before the Lord's day had attained that state in 
which it now standeth. And being brought to that 
state^ it doth not stand so firmly, but that those 
powers which raised it up, may take it lower if they 
please, yea take it quite away as to the time, and 
settle it on any other day, as to them seems best." 

In the long interval between the rise of the papal 
hierarchy and the reformation, there remain no traces 
of the existence of the modern Sabbatarian doctrine. 

" In all this time" says the same writer, after an 
elaborate review of the ecclesiastical history of these, 
and the preceding centuries, "in twelve hundred 
years, we have found no sabbath." It is well known, 
that although Sunday has all along been cele- 
brated in the Roman Catholic [church as a weekly 
festival, the doctrine of a weekly sabbath has, at no 
time, been a tenet of Romanism. The strict manner 
of keeping Sunday, which at present prevails in this 
country, cannot indeed, so far as we know, be traced 
farther back than the close of the sixteenth, or the 
commencement of the next century. It is deserving 
of remark, that the rigorous practice introduced by 
the Puritans about that time, was plainly felt by 
the bulk of the people to be a very disagreeable 
innovation on their former privileges : so great 
indeed, was the grievance and general dissatisfaction 
created by it in some places, that the northern coun- 
ties found it necessary to petition the government on 
the subject. It is manifest that the object of the 



142 

celebrated book of sports, which James I. and 
Charles I. dh'ected to be proclaimed, was not, as 
some have erroneously represented, to introduce a 
new and more lax manner of spending the Sundays 
than had formerly been allowed by the laws of the 
country, but simply to counteract, by sanctioning and 
encouraging the people in the maintenance of their 
accustomed enjoyments, the growing influence of the 
Puritan party. 

The early reformers appear to have regarded the 
observance of Sunday as being simply an institution 
of human origin, and as obligatory on no other 
ground than its expediency for purposes of religious 
instruction and worship. There is no indication in 
their writings of their holding it to be a divine ordi- 
nance : on the contrary, it was the practice of Calvin 
and others, to reprehend the observance of particular 
days as an unchristian superstition.^ It is matter of 
history that these views were entertained by both the 



^ A Christianis ergo abesse debet superstitiosa dierum observatio : &c. 

Instit^ Christ, chap, viii, sect. 31. 

Beza, much to the same purpose states, that though the custom of christians 
assembling on the Lord's day, was a useful tradition of the church, yet the 
practice of a total abstinence from labour on it, was not to be commended ; " for 
this practice" says he, " does not so much abolish Judaism, as put it off, and 
change it to another day." " There being no cessation of work required on 
the Lord's day, as was observed by the Jews on the sabbath," he thought that 
there was great danger of " this practice, (which was first brought in by Constan- 
tine with a good intent, that men, by being free from their worldly business, 
might give themselves to hear God's word,) degenerating into downright 
Judaism." 



143 

Lutheran and Calvinistic bodies on the continent/ 
and also by the founders of the reformed church in 
this country. The opinions of Cranmer upon the 
subject, have ah'eady been referred to. " And here 
note, good children/' says his Catechism formerly 
quoted, '^ that the Jews in the Old Testament were 
commanded to keep the sabbath day, and they obser- 
ved it every seventh day, called the sabbet or Satter- 
dav. But we christian men in the New Testament 
are not bound to such commandments of Moses' law, 
concerning difference of times, days, and meats, but 
have liberty and freedom to use other days for our 
sabbath days, thereon to hear the word of God 
and keep an holy rest." That these views were 
not peculiar to Cranmer, but were common to the 
whole English church, is manifest from the royal 
injunctions of 1547 and 1559, compared with 
an act passed 1552. In 1547 Edward VI. thus 
directed the clergy : — '' All parsons, vicars, and 
curates, shall teach and declare unto their parishion- 
ers, that they may, with a safe and quiet conscience, 
in the time of harvest labour upon the holy and festi- 
val days, and save that which God hath sent. And 



q The reader who wishes to satisfy himself of the views entertained of the 
sabbath by the leading divines at the period of the Reformation, is referred to 
Milton's Treatise on Christian Doctrine, translated by Sumner ; where will be 
found quotations from the respective works of Bucer, ISIusculus, Ursinus, and 
Gomarus, expressive of the disbelief on the part of every one of these learned 
writers of any sabbatical law under the gospel. 



144 

if for any scrupulosity or grudge of conscience, men 
should superstitiously abstain from working upon 
those days, that they should grievously offend and 
displease God." The festival days mentioned, 
included, it is well known, all Sundays in the year. 
These directions were adopted by Elizabeth in 1559, 
adding merely to the words '^ quiet conscience," 
" after their common prayer." The act of 1552 declar- 
ed it ^^ lawful for every husbandman, labourer, fisher- 
man, &c. upon the holy days aforesaid, in harvest 
time, or any other time in the year, when necessity 
shall require, to labour, ride, fish, or work any kind 
of work, at their free wills and pleasure." 

It was shortly after this, that the doctrine, that 
the prescriptions of the fourth commandment have 
been transferred to the first day of the week, was 
introduced into this country. It has been traced to 
a Dr. Bound, who published a book upon the subject 
in the year 1594. In this work he maintained "that 
where all other things in the Jewish church were so 
changed, that they were clean taken away, the day 
the sabbath was so changed, that it still remaineth : 
that there is great reason why we christians should 
take ourselves as strictly bound to rest upon the 
Lord's day, as the Jews were upon the sabbath ; for 
being one of the moral commandments, it bindeth as 
well as they, being all of equal authority."'' This new 

' Sabbath Doctrine, p. 91. — Cited by Heylin. 



145 

doctrine was for a long time strenuously opposed by 
the leading divines of the English church : it was 
warmly contended for however, by the Puritans, 
and shortly became one of the most distinguishing 
tenets of that party.^ 

Proceeding on the assumption that the fourth 
commandment is necessarily of perpetual obligation, 
the Puritan preachers, with an imposing confidence 
maintained, that the observance of a weekly sabbath 
formed an important and essential part of christian 
obedience. By what authority the prescriptions of 
this commandment have been transferred from the 
seventh day to the first, was a query to which they do 
not seem to have thought they were called upon to 
furnish an answer. Their own assertion, that this 
transference had actually taken place, appears to 
have been received then, as it has been received by 
multitudes since, as a proper substitute for the only 
authority by which an alteration of this kind can 
ever warrantably be made, in a positive precept 
of heaven. 

^ The controversy between the two parties in the church, respecting the sab- 
bath, was evidently begun much earlier than 1594. Mr. Strype informs us, 
that the Puritans denounced their rigorous persecutor, Bishop Aylmer, who 
became Bishop of London in 1576, as " a defender of the breach of the sabbath," 
because he used to play at bowls on that day. " Indeed," adds Mr. Strype, "it 
was the general custom, both at Geneva, and in all other places where Protes- 
tants inhabited, after the service of the Lord's day was over, to refresh them- 
selves with bowling, walking abroad, or other innocent recreations, and the 
Bishop followed that which, in his travels abroad, he had seen ordinarily 
practised among them." — Life of Aylmer, (1701) p. 25. See Notes to Burton's 
Diary. Vol. ii. p. 267. 

U 



146 

The rapid diffusion, and ultimate general and per- 
manent adoption of this Judaical notion is, doubtless, 
one of the most singular facts in the whole compass 
of modern ecclesiastical history. At first view, 
indeed, it appears wholly unaccountable, how a fig- 
ment* like this should ever have obtained a footing 
in the world. It is unquestionable, that in a very 
short time from its being first broached, among the 
religious classes in England it was almost univer- 
sally recognized as an indispensable christian obliga- 
tion ; and it has continued, it is well known, to be 
confidently regarded in the same light, by nearly all 
the various religious denominations which have sprung 
up in this country, since that period. As it is usual 
with many of the advocates of this doctrine, to refuse 
to admit that it was introduced by the Puritans at 
the period referred to ; and, as its introduction at 
that, or any other time, seems to be regarded by 
some persons as a circumstance so wholly unaccount- 
able and improbable, as of itself, to be almost tanta- 
mount to a proof of the practice having been 
transmitted from the apostolic age; it will be requisite 
to inquire somewhat particularly into the causes 
that led to its rise and rapid diffusion. The peculiar 
nature of some of the leading causes which favoured 



♦ It was customary with some of the Calvinistic divines of the United Provin- 
ces, to designate " the doctrine of the sabbath," maintained by their Puritan 
friends in this country, Figmentum Anglicanum. 



147 

the progress of the modern Sabbatarian doctrine, we 
now accordingly propose briefly to examine. 

This tenet, it is to be observed, formed an essen- 
tial branch of a connected scheme of religious doc- 
trine and discipline, constructed in adaptation to the 
Puritan plan of " a new reformation ;" and it is im- 
possible to conceive correctly of the circumstances 
connected with the general adoption of the obser- 
vance, without an examination of the principles on 
which this Puritan scheme was founded. Every in- 
novation like that of the observance of a weekly 
sabbath, naturally appears, at first view, very remark- 
able and unaccountable : we apprehend, however, 
that if the religious history of that period be carefully 
examined, our surprise in this case, will be greatly 
lessened, if not altogether removed. 

It was the common misfortune of that age, that 
the relation in which Christianity stands to the king- 
doms of this world, and the line of demarcation 
which divides the separate provinces of divine and 
human legislation, were, by no class, or sect, or party, 
correctly understood. In the view of all the leading 
men of that time, the object of civil government was 
not merely to afford protection to life and property, 
and to promote the temporal welfare of the commu- 
nity ; their notion of the duty which devolved on civil 
rulers, combined, with purposes of this nature, the 
maintenance of a ^proper and useful system of puhlic 
religious worship and instruction. This opinion 



148 

appears to have been common to all the early Puri- 
tans, whether Episcopalian or Presbyterian : it was 
by the latter, however, that it was in the most strict 
and rigid sense contended for, and to the system of 
ecclesiastical government, known by this designation, 
most of the leading Puritans, it is well known, secretly 
inclined. With these Presbyterian divines, the revi- 
val of the Judaical observance of a weekly sabbath 
seems to have originated : and it must be allowed, 
the institution was peculiarly adapted to that plan of 
national Christianity, which they aimed at ultimately 
establishing. 

The plan in question embraced a general scheme of 
civil and religious polity, the leading design of which, 
so far as reHgion was concerned, was to maintain a uni- 
form system of public worship and religious profession, 
under which, by the suppression of every appearance 
of error, whether in doctrine or discipline, every relic 
of Popish superstition, and shadow of heresy of every 
kind, might be banished out of the land. On the 
principles upon which this scheme was constructed, 
they were naturally led to maintain the lawfulness of 
employing coercive measures, in propagating and es- 
tabHshing what they called the true religion ; and 
accordingly, they felt no scruples in proposing to 
enforce their spiritual sentences by the sword of the 
civil magistracy. Although many of their own party 
had suffered severely under the iron rule of a despotic 
government^ and had even fallen martyrs in the 



149 



rightful cause of resistance to its oppressive and ini- 
quitous measures, they were quite prepared to inflict 
a similar system of civil and spiritual tyranny on all 
who, in matters of religion, ventured to differ from 
them, so soon as they could attain the object of 
their pursuit, namely, the possession of worldly influ- 
ence and dominion. 

The right of civil rulers to use coercive measures 
in accomplishing their religious projects, seems indeed 
throughout the greater part of the seventeenth centu- 
ry, to have been by none of the leading parties,"" ever 
called in question. The religious bodies in England 
and in Scotland, which suffered so severely under the 
oppressive measures of the Stuart dynasty, appear 
never to have thought of appealing against the injus- 
tice of inflicting civil penalties on men, for the mainte- 
nance of the sacred rights of conscience. The leading 
grievance of which they constantly complained was, 
that the trite religion, (that is, the system of religious 
profession which they themselves had embraced,) 
instead of being nourished and protected, as they 
thought it ought to have been, was wickedly opposed 
and trodden under foot, while popish and prelatical 
errors were allowed to be propagated and professed, 
with open liberty and impunity. These men had 
been tutored in the belief that the cause of Christian- 
ity could be advanced and supported only by the 
civil sword being enlisted on its side : their leading 

" The Brownists, and other sects, which ultimately came into notice, are of 
course not here referred to. 



150 

aim accordingly, was to acquire such a sway over 
the secular power, as would procure the removal of 
every part of the existing religious system that, in 
their view, was unscriptural and corrupt, and ensure 
the establishment of a purified and perfect system 
of national religious profession in its place. 

This favourite notion, of a pure and perfect system 
of national religious polity, seems to have formed an 
impervious veil over their minds, which effectually 
blinded them from the perception of the spiritual 
character of the gospel dispensation. It never ap- 
pears to have occurred to these zealous '' new refor- 
mers" that, as the kingdom of Christ is not of this 
world, it stands perfectly distinct from all earthly 
governments, and cannot possibly be supported by 
those compulsory enactments, which are the founda- 
tion of the civil power. So enamoured were they of 
their perfect platform of Presbyterian doctrine, wor- 
ship, and discipline, that it is probable, had the 
simple truth been stated to them, that as Christianity 
was not concerned with political matters, so human 
governments, on the other hand, were not concerned 
with men's religious opinions, but simply with their 
external conduct, it would have immediately been 
condemned as an impious heresy, and as involving 
consequences that were little better than downright 
Atheism. 

Their notion was, that the civil and ecclesiastical 
authorities combined, constituted one national chris- 
tian corporation, on which it devolved to suppress, by 



151 

the execution of efficient laws, all heresy and false 
worship. The maintenance of such a uniformity 
of public religious profession as would secure the 
spiritual welfare of the people, was, in their view, 
an object infinitely paramount to all considerations 
relative to the temporal well-being of society. In 
adaptation to this scheme of government accordingly, 
and in the expectation of its ultimate realization, 
their plans of religious reformation were all laid, and 
in conformity with it, the whole details of their scho- 
lastic system of divinity, were carefully, and cer- 
tainly with considerable consistency, constructed. 

There being, however, not the shadow of a warrant 
in any part of the New Testament, for uniting in 
this manner "the kingdom of heaven" with the 
political constitutions of this world, these men, who, it 
is to be kept in mind, professed in all their plans 
rigidly to adhere to scriptural precept and example, 
were obliged to revert to the state of things which 
existed under the Mosaic dispensation ; and there 
they discovered, as they imagined, a divine warrant 
for the scheme they had devised. That the Jewish 
commonwealth constitutes the divinely appointed 
model, on which all christian nations ought to be 
formed, was laid down as the fundamental principle 
on which their whole fabric of civil and ecclesiastical 
polity was to be reared. This adopted model fur- 
nished, in their view, an authoritative precedent for 
the use of coercive measures in furthering the 



152 

interests of that kingdom, of which its founder has 
emphatically said, " my kingdom is not of this world : 
if my kingdom were of this world, then would my 
servants fight ; but my kingdom is not from hence :" 
and it furnished at the same time a precedent of its 
kind, for the unnatural and baneful practice of uniting 
the subjects of Christ's kingdom with the men of this 
world, in the profession of the gospel of salvation. 
That every nation ought to be formed into a national 
church, and that the whole population ought to be 
made to conform to the established form of public 
worship, were assumed as first principles which ad- 
mitted of no dispute. As all the Jewish people were 
introduced into the national covenant in virtue of 
their natural birth, irrespective of personal character, 
and were thus all made members of the Jewish 
church, whether they were spiritual worshippers of 
Jehovah or not ; it was confidently inferred, that 
all persons born in a country professing the true 
religion, were members of " the visible church" of 
Christ, and entitled to partake of all its outward 
seals and privileges, irrespective of any evidence of 
personal Christianity. The figment of a foederal 
holiness, derived from their parental connexion with 
this worldly corporation, which they dignified with 
the designation, " the visible church," was thus 
constituted the ground on which individuals were re- 
cognized as subjects of that kingdom, all whose 
members, the writers of the New Testament state. 



153 

are " born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, 
nor of the will of man, but of God."" 

Because the Kings of Israel possessed a lawful 
authority to suppress all idolatry and false worship 
throughout the land of Canaan, it was maintained, 
that the strict suppression of all Popish superstition 



" This notion of " a fcederal holiness," though strenuously contended for by 
the primitive Presbyterians, has, among their modern successors, fallen into 
general desuetude. Of the various religious bodies known at present by the terra 
Presbyterian, there appears indeed to be scarcely one that has not, less or more, 
departed from the principles on which their predecessors constructed and 
founded the original system. The modern Socinians or Priestleyans, whom it 
is usual sometimes to designate " the English Presbyterians," hold, it is well 
known, scarcely one opinion in common with their nonconformist ancestors : 
having no presbyteries, or ecclesiastical courts of review of any kind, (the distin- 
guishing principles ofPresbyterianism,) they obviously retain no claim whatever 
to the designation. Even in Scotland, where the Presbyterian system of church go- 
vernment still prevails, it is now usual for the advocates of the system to abandon 
the scriptural ground which was so conscientiously taken up by its founders, 
and to rest its defence on considerations of expediency. In thus abandoning 
the doctrine of " a fcederal holiness," and some other original principles, on 
which alone, various of the religious practices which they still retain, can, with 
any colour of reason, be maintained, they expose themselves to the charge of a 
very glaring inconsistency. The only consistent and pure Presbyterians since 
the Revolution, appear to be the Covenanters, known we believe in Scotland 
by the appellation "the reformed Presbytery." Professing still to adhere to the 
solemn league and covenant, agreed to by the nation previous to the restoration 
in which popery and prelacy were abjured ; they also, with consistency, adhere 
to the whole system of worship, doctrine and discipline approved of by the 
Long Parliament, and Westminster Assembly. 

It has always appeared to us, that this small but respectable body, are the 
only consistent advocates of systems of national Christianity on professed scriptu- 
ral grounds. Though dissenters from the religious establishment at present ex- 
isting in Scotland, their dissent, it is well known, is founded not on any objec- 
tions to an alliance between the church and state, but to an alliance between the 
church and an uncovenanted king and government. 

X 



154 

and modern heresies that appeared within their terri- 
torial jurisdiction, was the bounden duty of every 
christian government. Thus, under the guise of 
scriptural support, derived from the abrogated eco- 
nomy of Moses, did these intolerant ecclesiastics 
proceed, with great show of scriptural arguments, and 
with abundance of express precepts and pointed pre- 
cedents, to attain the object they had in view, namely, 
the establishment of the notable scheme of a national 
uniformity of religious profession, and the extirpation 
of all heretics — the extirpation, in other words, of all 
who dared to differ from them in religious opinion, 
or who attempted to exercise man's unalienable right 
of worshipping his Maker acccording to the dictates 
of his own conscience/ 

^ It is scarcely requisite, we presume, to state, (and assuredly to every one 
who, unfettered by human systems has studied for himself the writings of the 
apostle Paul, it must be altogether superfluous,) that there exists no such analogy 
between the Old and New Testament state of things, as to warrant the assump- 
tion on which, the Puritans and the numerous other advocates of systems of 
national Christianity, (who propose to model the Christian on the plan of the 
Jewish church,) throughout their whole reasonings proceed. In Paul's epistles, 
and, indeed, in various other parts of the New Testament writings, the Mosaic 
economy and the gospel dispensation, instead of being represented as correspond- 
ing in nature, are designedly and strikingly contrasted. " The law was given 
by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." "Moses was faithful in all 
the house of God as a servant, but Christ as a Son over his own house." It is no 
doubt true, there was a church or congregation of God's people under the Old 
Testament state of things, as certainly as there is one under the New: it is to be 
remembered however, that though the Jews in a certain sense, may correctly 
enough be said to have constituted God's church under the old covenant, the 
kingdom of Israel differed from the kingdom of Christ as widely as the figure 
does from the reality, as the flesh does from the spirit, as earth from heaven. 



155 

It is obvious, that the institution of a weekly sab- 
bath, being essentially a national ordinance, harmo- 

The mere circumstance of the Jews, as well as the disciples of Christ, being 
sometimes designated the church of God, (that is, a people called out from 
others, and formed into a congregation,) does not, surely, of itself render it 
warrantable to deduce inferences from the one state of things and apply them to 
the other. Before these inferences can be admitted to be valid, it will be neces- 
sary to show, not only that there is a sameness of sound between the expressions 
the Jewish church and the Christian church, the kingdom of David and the 
kingdom of Christ ; but also, that there is a sufficient correspondence in their 
respective scriptural significations so as to constitute an analogy, not only in the 
names they bear, but in the things these names are designed to express. On 
the gross fallacy, however, of confounding the sound of these and similar ex- 
pressions, with their appropriate and distinct significations, the scriptural argu- 
ment in support of ecclesiastical establishments, has its whole foundation. 
Instead of these expressions being used by the inspired writers to describe sys- 
tems of correspondent nature and intention, they are employed to designate two 
states of things which are not only materially different, but which actually form 
a perfect contrast. Under the former, Jehovah, the God of Israel took the 
whole people into a national covenant, and gave them a peculiar system of reli- 
gious ordinances and civil polity, adapted to their theocratic government, which 
served at once to keep them separate from all other nations, and to preserve 
alive their remembrance and expectation of that Messiah, of whom they were 
ultimately to become the progenitors. When Christ came, this national covenant 
which had formed a partition wall, keeping Jew and Gentile asunder, was 
broken down, and the whole Mosaic ritual brought to its appointed end. The 
old covenant thus served, during the period of its existence, important purposes, 
peculiar to the then existing stage of the progress of the scheme of redemption ; 
and terminated in introducing a new and better covenant, founded on better 
promises, and ratified by the death of that Messiah, whose coming it had prefi- 
gured and foretold. The kingdom of Israel which thus ushered in the kingdoro 
of heaven, was earthly in its nature, and, like all other kingdoms of this world, 
was necessarily founded on force : as it had an earthly throne and earthly sub- 
jects, so had it earthly laws, which were enforced by physical coercion. 

Christ's kingdom on the other hand, is essentially spiritual in its nature ; its 
dependence is in no degree enforce, but solely on the influence of "the truth" 
on men's understandings and consciences. It is established, not by human laws, 
but by the death and resurrection of Jesus the true Messiah, and its subjects are 



156 

nized completely with this proposed plan of national 
religious uniformity. It is obvious too, that in 
adopting the Judaical decalogue as the rule of chris- 
tian duty, and in proposing to enforce the strict 
observance of the prescriptions of the fourth com- 
mandment on the v^^hole population, they were not 
only acting consistently with their own principles, 
but were, at the same time, introducing a practice 
peculiarly adapted to promote and perpetuate that 
ecclesiastical domination, which they seem confidently 
to have expected they would, in the end, succeed in 
establishing. 

For the reception of this sabbatical doctrine, the 
people, it is to be kept in mind, were in a considera- 
ble measure prepared, by having previously been 
accustomed to pay a religious respect to Sunday as a 
festival of the church. The change that took place 

notborn such, but are oW. persuaded to become citizens by their minds being en- 
lightened to discern that divine evidence by vphich the gospel of salvation is 
attested. Its throne is no longer in any earthly Jerusalem, but in the Jerusalem 
that is above ; for there it is, that the risen Saviour sits, swaying the sceptre of 
love over the hearts of a willing people. The laws of this kingdom are not de- 
signed for national communities like the Jews, but for those individuals only in 
every nation, who, by believing the gospel, have been "born again," and have been 
thus taught to render to these laws a willing obedience, the only obedience the 
government recognizes. Thus, from its entire spirituality of nature ; — from the 
spiritual character of its subjects, from the spiritual obedience its laws require, 
as well as from the spiritual influence which alone it employs in procuring that 
obedience, this kingdom is essentially distinct, and wholly separate from the 
kingdom of Israel, and also from all the kingdoms of this world. All reasoning, 
it is manifest, which confounds things thus fundamentally different, must ne- 
cessarily be fallacious and futile. 



157 

was^ indeed, not so much in the practice of the 
people, as in the grounds on which their practice as a 
rehgious obligation, was made to rest. The obser- 
vance of the day, as a religious holiday, as well as 
the observance of all the other festivals of the 
church, had previously been regarded as resting on 
ecclesiastical tradition and authority : from this 
ground the Presbyterian divines removed the custom, 
and attempted to place it on the basis of scriptural au- 
thority, insisting that the sanctification of the whole 
day to religious purposes, was the express command of 
heaven. The respect that previously had been paid to 
the day as a festival of the church was thus converted 
into the sanctification of a weekly sabbath, in obedi- 
ence to the prescriptions of the decalogue. 

The change which was in this way made in the 
character of the observance, was introduced, it is 
prdSable, very gradually, and at first perhaps, was 
hot even noticed as being any material innovation 
on the existing practice. The more strict professors 
of religion, who, it is to be remembered, were all 
attached to the Puritan preachers, had already been 
accustomed to observe Sunday and the other holidays 
and festivals, with peculiar strictness and solemnity ; 
much in the same way as we see Christmas, Good 
Friday, and similar seasons, kept by the more scru- 
pulous members of the church of England at the 
present time. As this strict and devout manner of 
keeping this weekly festival, would be generally 



158 

viewed as an evidence of personal piety, and as fa- 
vourable to the interests of public religion, it is very 
probable, that in changing the ground of the obliga- 
tion from ecclesiastical authority to a divine precept, 
the Puritan divines imagined they were doing the 
cause of Christianity an important service. Whether, 
indeed, they were influenced purely by this motive, 
or, as has sometimes been alleged, by considerations 
of a more worldly and selfish nature, it is difficult 
now, perhaps, satisfactorily to decide : certain it is, 
that the alteration which took place proved highly 
advantageous to the interests of their own party. The 
strict manner of observing the sabbath, which they 
inculcated on the people, harmonized entirely with 
the austere notions of religious discipline, which at 
that time were so popular among the religious 
classes, and came soon to be regarded as a test of 
men's attachment to what was then called " the cause 
of vital godliness." Coming forward under this 
imposing guise, the doctrine readily insinuated itself 
into the confidence of the religious part of the com- 
munity, and in a very short time, the conscientious 
observance of the sahhath day, was generally recog- 
nized among all the adherents of the Puritan 
preachers as an important branch of practical piety. 
*' Jewish and Rabbinical though this doctrine were," 
says one of their contemporaries, " it carried a fair 
face and shew of piety, at least in the face of the 
common people : and such who stood not to examine 



159 

the true grounds thereof, but took it up on the 
appearance : such who did judge thereof, not by the 
workmanship of the stuff, but the gloss and colour. 
In which it is most strange to see, how suddenly men 
were induced not only to give way unto it, but with- 
out more ado to abet the same ; till, in the end, and 
that in a very little time, it grew the most bewitching 
error, the most popular deceit, that had been ever set 
on foot in the church of England." *' And verily I per- 
suade myself," continues this writer, '^ that many an 
honest and well meaning man, both of the clergy 
and of the laity, either because of the appearance of 
the thing itself, or out of some opinion of those men, 
who endeavoured to promote it, became exceedingly 
afiPected towards the same, as taking it to be a doc- 
trine sent down from heaven for the increase of piety, 
so easily did they believe it, and grew, at last, so 
strongly possessed therewith, that in the end, they 
would not willing be persuaded to conceive otherwise 
thereof, than at first they did ; or think they swal- 
lowed down the hook when they took the bait. An 
hook, indeed which had so fastened them to those 
men who love to fish in troubled waters, that by this 
artifice, there was no small hope conceived amongst 
them, to fortifie their side, and make good that cause 
which, till this trim deceit was thought of, was 
almost grown desperate."^ 

This representation of Heylin's, is, perhaps, in 

y Heylin's History of the Sabbath.— Part II. Chap. 8. 



160 

some degree, exaggerated ; it is little to be doubted, 
however, but that it is substantially correct. It is cer- 
tain that the Sabbatarian doctrine became very service- 
able in strengthening the hands of the " new reform- 
ers ;" for as the rigorous observance of the Sunday, 
which was then becoming prevalent, was discounte- 
nanced by the other party in the church, the people, 
on account of this opposition, became more and more 
decidedly attached to the Puritan preachers, as being, 
in their view, the only supporters of the cause of seri- 
ous piety. A conscientious observance of the duties of 
the sabbath came shortly indeed to be recognized as a 
distinguishing evidence of personal religion, and 
formed one of those peculiarities of behaviour, from 
which the Puritans derived their religious designa- 
tion. In this way the doctrine took deep root in the 
rehgious feelings of the people. The notion of the 
perpetuity of the sabbath, harmonized not more 
with those Judaical views of Christianity which were 
at that time prevalent, than a compliance with its 
rigorous prescriptions did, with the austere temper of 
the age. The doctrine thus rapidly became on all sides 
popular, and was in a short time universally recog- 
nized, both by preachers and people, as an essential 
part of practical religion. 

As, with all those persons who conscientiously re- 
cognized this obligation, the sanctification of the 
sabbath became necessarily an indication of the 
regard they felt for divine authority, it naturally 



161 

followed, that the most pious of every religious com- 
munity, were distinguished as strict observers of its 
prescriptions ; and in this manner the duty came ul- 
timately to be associated with sanctity of character, 
with the cause of vital piety. To this supposed 
necessary connexion between the observance of the 
sabbath, and practical personal religion, the trans- 
mission of the Puritan doctrine to nearly all 
the various religious denominations, at present in 
this country, and the unsuspecting confidence with 
which it has, by all parties, been received, seems to 
be, in a great measure, owing. By being constantly 
viewed in this important light, people's attention has 
been directed almost exclusively to the proper obser- 
vance of its duties ; the grounds on which their 
obligation are supposed to rest, being regarded 
as immovably established, have, in comparatively 
few cases, been examined or understood. It has 
confidently been assumed, that the interests of 
christian piety, and the observance of the sabbath are 
so identified, that the one cannot survive without 
the other. Viewed constantly in this light, the doc- 
trine has usually been acquiesced in without much 
thought or inquiry, and has thus been transmitted 
from one generation to another, as an established 
and indisputable christian obligation. 

The preceding reference to the testimony of eccle- 
siastical history, has not been made, it may be proper 
to state, with any view of representing the opinions 



162 

and practices of former ages, as affording the smallest 
degree of evidence upon this subject, of an authori- 
tative nature. The historical facts that have been 
brought forward, form however, it is obvious, a very 
strong connecting chain of corroborative testimony, 
in support of the conclusion which was formerly 
drawn from an examination of the authoritative evi- 
dence of the inspired writers. On the single ques- 
tion, whether or not the sabbatical institution was 
viewed by the apostles as terminating with the 
Mosaic economy, the controversy concerning the 
existing obligation of the sabbath, it is to be borne 
in mind, wholly hinges. That the apostles regarded 
the institution as retaining no obligation on the sub- 
jects of the new covenant, has been made manifest, 
w^e trust, by scriptural proofs, alike incontrovertible 
and decisive : now with this conclusion, it is to be 
observed^ the testimony of early antiquity is in 
entire accordance. With the supposition, on the 
other hand, on which the modern Sabbatarian doc- 
trine is founded, the facts w^hich stand upon his- 
torical record, appear to be wholly irreconcilable. 
If the sabbath had been transferred to christians 
at the resurrection, its duties must doubtless have 
been recognized and observed during the first cen- 
turies : of any recognition of these duties, however, 
there remains no trace in the records of early 
antiquity. It certainly appears extremely impro- 
bable that this supposed transference of the insti- 



163 

tution, from the seventh day to the first, should 
have been made by the apostles, and yet that 
the duties implied in this authoritative alteration, 
should have remained unrecognized, until their 
conjectural discovery by a few Judaizing^ divines 
in the close of the sixteenth century. 



2 In applying this epithet to the Presbyterian divines of that time, and in 
freely expressing our dissent from the system of ecclesiastical polity which they 
aimed at establishing, we may be allowed to disclaim all intention of wishing to 
depreciate the character of those religious men, who, during the former part of 
the seventeenth century, so manfully maintained their rights as Englishmen, 
in resisting the tyrannnical measures of the court party. The English 
Puritans, viewing them as a whole body, (comprehending Episcopalians, Presby- 
terians, and ultimately Independents,) must stand for ever high in the esteem 
of all who have at heart the cause of civil and religious freedom : by their patri- 
otic conduct, they fairly brought to light the cause of truth and liberty as the 
common cause of mankind, and bequeathed it to the safe care and keeping of 
future generations. " Many, no doubt who obtained, an undue ascendancy among 
them, in the turbulent days of Charles I.," says Scott, the commentator,* " and 
even before that time, were factious, ambitious hypocrites ; but I must think 
that the tree of liberty, sober and legitimate liberty, civil and religious, under the 
shadow of which, we in the Establishment, as well as others, repose in peace, 
and the fruit of which we gather, was planted by the Puritans, and watered, if not 
by their blood, at least by their tears and sorrows. Yet it is the modern fashion 
to feed delightfully on the fruit, and then revile, if not curse, those who planted 
and watered it." The senseless fashion of ridiculing and traducing these men, 
is, even among churchmen, it is to be hoped, coming to a close. Much that is 
valuable in the institutions of this country, and in the character of its people, is 
doubtless to be traced to that spirit of independence, and to those habits of indus- 
trious application, by which the religious classes in England were, at that time, 
so favourably distinguished. 

It is quite possible, however, to be duly sensible of the benefits which these 
men have conferred on the cause of civil and religious freedom, without shutting 
our eyes to the evils of that intolerant system of national religion, which the 

* Rev. Thos. Scott's Letters to the Rev. P. Wroe, on the Evils of separation.— p. 2. 



164 



Presbyterian party wished to introduce. ** I disliked the course of some of the 
more rigid of them," says Baxter, who was himself partial to the system, " that 
drew near to the way of prelacy, by grasping at a kind of secular power, not 
using it themselves, but binding the magistrates to confiscate or imprison men, 
merely because they were excommunicated, and so corrupting the true discipline 
of the church, and turning the communion of saints into the communion of the 
multitude, that must keep in the church against their wills, for fear of being un- 
done in the world. Whereas, a man whose conscience cannot feel a just excom- 
munication, unless it be backed with confiscation or imprisonment, is no fitter 
to be a member of a christian church, than a corpse is to be a member of a 
corporation. They corrupt the discipline of Christ by mixing it with secular 
force ; and they reproach the keys, or ministerial power, as if it were not worth 
a straw, unless the magistrate's sword enforce it ; and worst of all, they corrupt 
the church by forcing in the rabble of the unfit and unwilling, and thereby 
tempt many godly christians to schisms, and dangerous separations."* 

It is well known, that it was usual with some of the most celebrated of these 
Presbyterian divines, openly to contend that the suppression of * schismatics' 
was the bounden duty of the magistrate, and to represent toleration as 
the flood-gate which was to let in all manner of innovation and danger; 
as the hydra of schism and heresy, and of all imaginable evils. It was 
with a view to confute the * monstrous imagination' of religious liberty, 
that Edwards wrote his ' Gangrena,' and his * Casting down of the last 
and strongest hold of Satan, or a Treatise against Toleration: As a specimen of 
the contents of these works, the following may sufiice. — " A toleration is the 
grand design of the devil, his masterpiece, and chief engine he works by at this 
time, to uphold his tottering kingdom. It is the most compendious, ready, sure 
way to destroy all religion, lay all waste, and bring in all evil. It is a most 
transcendant Catholic and fundamental evil for this kingdom, of any that can be 
imagined. As original sin is the most fundamental sin, having the seeds and 
spawns of all in it, so a toleration hath all errors in it, and all evils. It is 
against the whole stream and current of scripture, both in the Old and New 
Testament; both in matters of faith and manners; both general and particular 
commands. It overthrows all relations, political, ecclesiastical, and economical. 
And, whereas, other evils, whether of judgment or practice, be but against some 
one or two places of scripture or relation, this is against all — this is the Abaddon, 
ApoUyon, the destroyer of all religion, the abomination of desolation and 
astonishment, the liberty of perdition ; and therefore the devil follows it night 
and day : working mightily in many by writing books for it, and other ways : 



* Baxter's own Life.— Part ii, p. 140. 



165 

all the devils in hell, and their instruments, being at work to promote a tolera- 
tion." These bitter railings, it is to be observed, were not confined to a few 
violent individuals ; the whole body of the London Presbyterian ministers, 
addressed a letter to the "Westminster Assembly, in which they solemnly declare 
how much " they detest and abhor the much endeavoured toleration." The jus 
divinum of church government, published by the same body, argues for " a com- 
pulsory, coactive, punitive, corrective power to the political magistrate in matters 
of religion."* It was truly with much reason that Milton said of such men, 
* New Presbyter is but old priest, writ large.' 

* See works of Dr. John Owen.— Vol i. p. 33. 



SECTION V. 

ON THE PRACTICE OF USING THE JUDAICAL DECALOGUE 
AS THE RULE OF CHRISTIAN DUTY. 

Although the Puritan divines appear to have been 
the first who openly maintained that the duties of 
the fourth commandment have been transferred to 
the first day of the week, and retain, with this altera- 
tion, their obligation under the gospel ; the seeds of 
this doctrine seem to have been sown at a much 
earlier period of history. The edict of Constantine, 
which established the observance of the weekly festi- 
val of Sunday, as the municipal law of the Roman 
empire, while it suppressed that party which had 
previously contended for the observance of the 
seventh day sabbath, paved the way for the revival 
of the Sabbatarian doctrine under a new aspect, and 
with much greater success, in a subsequent age. 

It has been the pecuhar misfortune of Christianity, 
that through a false form of it having at an early 
period been converted into a state religion, and 
through its institutions and precepts having, ever 



lea 



since that time, been interwoven with the affairs of 
civil governments, its doctrines and duties have been 
usually interpreted, in adaptation to systems of civil 
and religious polity with which it has no natural con- 
nexion. By being habitually viewed through the 
distorting medium of worldly appearances, its true 
character and design have, to a very considerable 
extent, been frequently lost sight of and forgotten. 
The primary design of the gospel, it is to be observ- 
ed, was not to promote the purposes of civil rulers, 
or directly to subserve, in any shape, the temporal 
well-being of society, but to make known the divine 
purpose of love and mercy in the redemption of a 
lost world through Jesus Christ. As that important 
truth^ which constitutes the gospel of salvation, is 
really understood and believed only in those cases 
where the human mind is enlightened to discern the 
divine evidence by which it is attested, so the obli- 
gations which the belief of this truth implies, can be 
felt in their true force only by those " who obey it 
from the heart." It was for these persons, it is ever 
to be remembered, that the institutions and precepts 
of Christianity were designed, and not for the 
promiscuous characters of which every political 
society is necessarily composed.'' The practice of 



* See John xviii. 37, compared with xx. 31. II John i. I Peter i. 21-25. 

'' Among the numerous evils that have arisen from the incorporation of 
Christianity with political institutions, the least has not been the ambiguity of 
meaning which now attaches to the term christian, and the constant and gross 



169 

applying this revelation of mercy to purposes of state 
policy, and of interpreting its precepts in accommo- 

abuse of this designation in its common application to promiscuous multitudes of 
men, the bulk of whom are wholly ignorant of what Christianity is, or of what 
a christian ought to be. The practice of giving this name to all persons born in 
a particular country, seems to be not less irrational than it is manifestly injurious 
to the interests of christian truth. On other subjects we never think of saying 
a person is a believer in any particular doctrine, who is destitute of all know- 
ledge of its nature ; and with much reason ; for no one can correctly be said to 
believe any set of opinions, who is unacquainted with the grounds on which they 
rest, and the evidence by which they are supported ; without this knowledge, 
the profession of their belief, it is obvious, must necessarily be mere credulity, 
or presumption, or hypocrisy. In the same way, no one has any proper claim 
to the designation christian, who is not in possession of evidence producing a 
personal conviction of the truth, and adaptation to his own particular circum- 
stances, of that peculiar revelation of mercy which Christianity makes known. 
The gospel, in proclaiming to a perishing world the highest boon of heaven, 
namely, a message of mercy suflScient for the purpose of the guiltiest of man- 
kind, and free to the use of every one, is accompanied with a divine evidence of 
its verity, which implies an obligation on all whom it reaches, to receive it in 
its true character, as an authoritative communication from their Maker. This 
message, it is to be observed, is addressed to men on their individual responsi- 
bility, and those accordingly, who treat it with neglect, or who refuse to believe 
it, do so at their own peril. To their own Maker, however, they are answerable 
for their belief, and not to any fellow-man. On the subject of Christianity, as 
well as on every other, men are as free to think, (i. e. naturally free, not morally 
so,) as they are free to breathe ; and assuredly, they are not called upon to pro- 
fess the belief of that which they are ignorant of, or do not believe ; and which, 
so long as its divine evidence remains undiscerned, it is certain they cannot 
possibly believe. 

All who recognize the divine authority of revelation, may, no doubt, in a cer- 
tain sense, be said to be believers in Christianity. It is quite possible, however, 
to entertain a belief that the bible is true, without being enlightened to appre- 
hend that particular " truth" which constitutes the good news of salvation. 
During the apostolic age, they alone were called christians, who credited the 
testimony which the apostles delivered concerning Jesus of Nazareth, and who, 
in consequence of their belief, worshipped and served Him as their risen Lord, 
their anointed and divinely attested Saviour ; thus " obeying from the heart" 
the facts which they had learned, 

Z 



170 

dation to systems of national religion, has naturally 
led to a serious misconception both of the doctrines 

It was the remark of a writer in the early ages of the church, that men were 
not born christians as they were born Jews, or Greeks, or Romans : that they 
became so afterwards by their personal knowledge and belief of the gospel. 
Through the misapplication of scriptural terms, and other sources of delusion, 
many people now seem to think they are born christians, much in the same 
manner as, by the accident of birth, they are born Britons. It is a false and 
misnamed charity, which would perpetuate this delusion, rather than hurt 
people's feelings by exposing the mistake under which they labour. In re- 
ligion, as in other matters, men and systems ought surely to receive their 
correct and appropriate designations, and be made to stand on their own merits : 
it would be better indeed, we apprehend, for all parties, (and certainly it 
would be much more consistent,) if people desisted from making any profession 
of the gospel, until they actually understood and believed it. At all events, it 
serves no end but to create confusion and self-deception, to call those persons 
christians, who do not give the gospel credit on the authority of Him who has 
revealed it, or who remain ignorant altogether of its import. It is certain, 
that all who do believe that the christian revelation of mercy is, of itself, a suflS- 
cient ground of confidence for eternity, must, at all times be prepared, with the 
christians in apostolic times, to give a reason for the hope that is in them 
to all who may ask for it. A christian, in the scriptural sense of the term, it is to 
be observed, does not mean a person who has wrought himself into a good opinion 
of his religious state and character, by imagining he has arrived at certain at- 
tainments in piety, sufficient, as he thinks, to distinguish himself from others, 
and to form a proper recommendation to the divine favour ; but one who 
is firmly persuaded on proper grounds that the apostolic testimony conceraing 
Jesus of Nazareth is true, and who acts accordingly. They alone who really 
understand and give credit to this testimony, can with propriety be said to 
be subjects of that kingdom whicli Christ came to establish ; and on them alone 
devolves the management of its affairs. Were the propagation and defence of 
the principles of this kingdom left to those to whom the duty appertains, it would 
conduce greatly, we are inclined to think, to the spread of scriptural truth and 
true religion. In giving expression to this sentiment, we are gratified to find we 
have been forestalled by one of the living ornaments of the Church of England. 
'* Many persons who call themselves christians," says Dr. Arnold, "are so total- 
ly ignorant of their religion, that they attack and revile its precepts, pretending 
that they are merely the precepts of the clergy. Hence it is, that so many 
books not written by avowed believers, are full of principles quite opposite to 



171 

it makes known, and of the duties it enjoins. When 
schemes of divinity, constructed in adaptation to 
worldly systems of this kind, are once established, 
their influence is frequently felt long after the opin- 
ions upon which they were originally grounded, have 
become exploded ; and are thus allowed permanently 
to affect men's general views of the christian revela- 
tion. Several of the customs which obtained during 
the dark ages of popery, when the worst of all forms 
of national Christianity was spread over Europe, have 
in this way long survived the leading purposes to 
which they were originally applied. For several 
centuries preceding the Reformation, the practice 
seems generally to have prevailed, of committing to 
memory the apostle's creed, the Lord's prayer, and 
the ten commandments : as these summaries were 
regarded as expressing all things necessary to be 
believed and practised, the formal repetition of them 
was viewed as a necessary, and, at the same time, a 
sufficient profession of Christianity. 

those of the gospel ; because there are so many persons who, not disclaiming the 
name of christian altogether, have yet no clear knowledge of what a christian 
ought to be. But how foolish, on every calculation, is such indecisive behaviour 
as this ! Would that they would take one side or the other : that they would 
either be servants of Christ in earnest, or renounce him openly, and say, that 
they have nothing to do with Jesus of Nazareth and his salvation. Happy, 
indeed, it would be for the church of Christ, if all its false friends were to de- 
clare themselves its enemies : the gospel would then be no more reproached 
with the scandal of their evil lives, and the true believers would be drawn more 
closely to one another, and would feel the name of christian to be a real tie of 
brotherhood." 



172 

That the Judaical decalogue comprehended the 
whole sum of moral obligation, was, at that time, 
assumed as an established point : the duties it en- 
joins, and the sins it prohibits, were accordingly 
enforced on the whole population, as the obedience 
which God requires of man. When the then exist- 
ing state of popular ignorance is remembered, this 
use of the decalogue will not excite much surprise. 
That the national code of laws adapted, in divine 
wisdom, to an ignorant and uncivilized people like 
the Israelites in the wilderness, should have been 
transferred, during the middle ages, to the form of 
national religion, which was then thrown over the 
kingdoms of this world, seems, indeed, rather natural 
than otherwise. By blending in this manner the insti- 
tutions of Judaism with the christian revelation, the 
public rehgion became much better adapted to the 
purposes of elementary instruction, as well as of 
procuring that servile subjection, which the civil and 
ecclesiastical rulers then demanded of those, over 
whom they held the reins of government. It could 
scarcely have been expected, however, that this 
practice, the relic of an ignorant and superstitious 
age, should have been continued subsequent to the 
Reformation ; and it seems still more extraordinary, 
that the same antiquated practice should have been 
allowed to prevail even to the present day. Extra- 
ordinary as this circumstance is, it has so happened, 
that the Mosaic code of national law has, ever since 



173 

the age of the Puritans, been retained, as constituting 
an integral and most important part of every system 
of theology, making any pretension to what is called 
orthodoxy. 

That the moral law is summarily comprehended 
in the ten commandments, has been laid down by the 
Westminster Assembly of Divines and others, as a 
proposition so indubitable and important, as to be 
at the foundation of all correct views of moral obli- 
gation. The fourth commandment being thus for- 
mally recognized as a moral precept, the perpetual 
obligation of the sabbatical observance w^hich it 
prescribes, seems, certainly, very naturally and ne- 
cessarily to follow ; as this commandment, however, 
not merely requires the Israelites to remember the 
sabbath day to keep it holy, but expressly states, 
that " the seventh day is the sabbath" of Jehovah, it 
assuredly does not necessarily follow that there is im- 
plied in its prescriptions an obligation to sanctify 
Sunday, a day to which the commandment never, in 
any way refers. Aware of this palpable disregard 
of the plainest laws of logic, the Puritan divines 
boldly announced that the duties of the command- 
ment, have been transferred from the seventh day 
to the first ; and solely, apparently, on the ground of 
this unsupported assertion, the obligation to keep 
Sunday as a holy sabbath has continued to be recog- 
nized ever since. 

As the practice of using the decalogue as the rule 



174 

of christian duty, thus appears to have been the 
source, in which the doctrine of a christian sabbath 
originated ; and, as the continued prevalence of this 
practice seems to be a principal cause of the Sabba- 
tarian doctrine being still retained in the world, it 
may be requisite now to inquire, whether the incor- 
poration of the Jewish code of national law with the 
gospel dispensation, be warranted by any legitimate 
scriptural authority 

It is deserving of peculiar notice, that some of the 
chief errors and corruptions that have disfigured and 
oppressed the christian religion, have been introduced 
and maintained under the guise of scriptural support, 
supposed to be derived from the Old Testament 
state of things. The erroneous principle, that the 
Hebrew commonwealth constitutes the model on 
which all nations professing Christianity ought to 
form their civil and religious polity, was at the 
foundation, as has already been remarked, of all the 
Puritan systems of scholastic theology : this principle 
influenced the entire construction of these systems, 
and thus biassed their authors in the interpretation 
of every part of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. 
All the scholastic systems of divinity that have been 
in popular use since the time of the Puritans, seem 
to have been cast in the same mould as theirs was: 
and it has unfortunately happened, that these systems 
have, in numerous cases, been more regarded in the 
formation of men's religious opinions, than the 



175 

authoritative writings of the apostles of Christ, 
The practice indeed of teaching people Christianity 
through the medium of schemes of systematic 
theology, appears to be greatly, if not wholly at 
variance with the artless and unartificial manner in 
which divine truth has been communicated in the 
sacred volume, and has ever been a fertile source of 
misconception and error. In no part of the Old or 
New Testament, it is deserving of remark, is there 
contained any set of principles, or creed, or formu- 
lary, embracing all things necessary to be believed 
and practised ; neither is there ever any formal ar- 
rangement made of divine knowledge, in a scientific 
and systematic order. The truths which the inspired 
writers make known, are not stated as matters of 
speculation, or as abstract propositions, but as 
authoritative principles implying necessary and cor- 
responding duties : and these duties, on the other 
hand, are not stated as bare precepts, but are en- 
joined on the supposition that the principles are 
understood, and the motives felt, by which they are 
enforced. In this way is divine truth interspersed 
throughout the whole of the scriptures ; communi- 
cated, not systematically, but as it were inciden- 
tally, in historical narratives, in prophecies, in para- 
bles, in conversations, and in epistles, as different 
occasions called for. The Bible makes known a 
clear revelation of the mind and will of God ; and 
this revelation is easily understood by all people of 



176 

plain and unsophisticated minds ; in order, however, 
to derive that benefit which the attainment of this 
knowledge never fails to impart, it is quite ne- 
cessary that men should take their religious 
opinions directly from the Bible itself, and give 
credit to every scriptural statement, solely on the 
ground of its divine and authoritative character. It 
is one thing to acquire an accurate knowledge of 
systems of divinity, and it is another to be taught of 
God, the truths revealed in his word. It is quite 
possible for men to acquire a knowledge of doctrines 
that are scriptural in themselves, and to continue to 
hold them on the ground of creeds and confessions of 
faith, without their consciences ever being brought 
into contact with divine authority. Speculative 
knowledge of this kind, it is manifest cannot, in the 
nature of things, produce those beneficial effects, 
which never fail to accompany the truths of the 
gospel, w4ien believed on the direct testimony of 
God himself. 

Independent, indeed, of this obvious danger, 
arising from the use of these scholastic systems, the 
fatal mistake of regarding the doctrines of Christi- 
anity as matters of speculation, and holding them 
merely as such, is very readily fallen into, and can- 
not be too sedulously guarded against : it seems to 
be the natural tendency of the practice in question, 
however, to generate and increase the evil. Through 
men's minds too, being pre-occupied with systems of 



177 

this kind, they are naturally led to interpret every 
part of the scriptures in accordance with the conclu- 
sions they have learnt from human teachers, instead 
of sitting down, with the docility of children, at the 
feet of Jesus, and learning for themselves, on his 
authority, the truths his apostles have made known. 
They learn a system of divinity first, and afterwards 
proceed to make every part of the Bible quadrate 
with their preconceived notions, instead of simply 
attending to that voice which has addressed men 
from heaven, and interpreting according to its 
authoritative direction, the prophetic word as ex- 
plained by the apostolic testimony. In all these, and 
in various other ways, the practice of teaching men 
the doctrines of Christianity, through the medium of 
human creeds and scholastic systems, seems naturally 
fraught with evils and dangers, alike numerous and 
baneful. 

It is ever to be remembered, that the gospel was 
not primarily designed for the professional use and 
purposes of scholastic theologians, but for the use 
and benefit of a perishing world, that, by under- 
standing and believing that divine testimony con- 
cerning Jesus, which it reveals, men may be made 
wise unto salvation. This invaluable wisdom is alike 
necessary for all, and it is freely ofiered to every one : 
it is to be obtained, however, not by learning systems 
of divinity, but by hearkening, with entire subjection 

A A 



178 

of conscience, to the voice which came from the most 
excellent glory, testifying concerning Jesus of 
Nazareth — " This is my beloved Son ; in whom I 
am well pleased." 

It seems to have been a good deal owing to men's 
attaching an improper importance to the antiquated 
systems of theology in question, that the natural 
method of interpreting the various portions of divine 
revelation, so distinctly pointed out by the apostles, 
has been so greatly disregarded and overlooked. 
That the New Testament is the only authentic com- 
mentary on all the divine dispensations which pre- 
ceded the gospel, is one of the most important 
principles laid down in the apostolic writings : for, 
except we be guided by it in our interpretation of the 
sacred volume, we must ever fail to apprehend, with 
accuracy, the respective natures and designs of the 
various dispensations of revealed religion, under 
which men have been placed. 

In order to arrive at a satisfactory knowledge of 
the extensive and varied contents of the Bible, it is 
necessary to begin, as in the study of other subjects, 
at first principles, and thoroughly to understand 
them, before we attempt to comprehend other truths 
in which this knowledge is implied. Now in the 
case of the scriptures, these first principles are not to 
be found, as many seem to suppose, in the book of 
Genesis, but in " the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son 
pf God." This gospel, as taught by the apostles. 



179 

is the only key which opens to us the rich contents 
of the sacred volume : it alone brings life and im- 
mortality to light, and gives a clear revelation of 
the divine character, as just and merciful in perfec- 
tion, in advancing and completing the scheme of 
redemption. All the preceding '' words of the pro- 
phets,"'' (which, viewed apart from this scheme, 
naturally appeared obscure and incomplete,) have 
received their confirmation and fulfilment, in the 
coming of the Messiah, and, to a considerable 
degree, are now superseded by the noon-tide light of 
a clear and completed revelation. The apostle 
Peter represents the Old Testament revelation, as 
" a lamp burning in a dark place," giving a faint and 
imperfect view of the glory that was to follow : 
while he approves of the attention that christians 
were then paying to this light, on account of its 
giving a shadowy representation of the great truth 
made known to them, by the divine testimony, 
concerning Jesus, he, at the same time, gives 
them this important caution : — '^ Knowing this 
first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any 
private interpretation : for the prophecy came not in 
old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God 
spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. But 
there were false prophets among the people, even as 
there shall be false teachers among you, who privily 

' II. Peter i. 19. 



180 

shall bring in damnable heresies."'^ The rule here laid 
down as a first principle to guide us in the interpre- 
tation of the Old Testament writings, is simply this : 
that, as prophecy was not uttered of old by the will 
of man, it is not to be understood now according to 
the pleasure and speculation of men, but according 
to the interpretation which has been given of it by 
God himself; namely, in the testimony delivered 
concerning Jesus, " This is my beloved Son, in whom 
I am well pleased." In the anticipation of false 
teachers, who might interpret the prophetic word 
according to their own will, and bring in craftily, 
destructive opinions, this testimony was committed 
by the apostles to writing, that in every age, chris- 
tians might, by attending to it, be preserved from 
those private interpretations of men, which were at 
variance with the authoritative interpretation of 
heaven. 

We are thus impressively taught by Peter, to 
reject every commentary on the Old Testament 
Scriptures, that does not accord with that only 
authentic commentary upon them which is contained 
in the New. The apostles of Christ are the only 
infallible guides in explaining the Old Testament 
revelation, and every exposition of it devised by 
scholastic theologians or assemblies of divines, is to 
be rejected, which is inconsistent with the testimony 

^ II. Peter i. 20. 



181 

they have delivered. Instead then of interpreting 
the New Testament through the medium of the Old, 
we are called upon to interpret the writings of Moses, 
and every other part of the prophetic word, in the 
light of the divine testimony concerning Jesus, and 
agreeably to the directions the apostles have given 
us. The veil that was upon Moses' face, has now 
been removed by the apostles of Christ : and in 
making known the things formerly concealed under 
the symbols and carnal ordinances of the law, they 
use great plainness of speech ; for they, with unveiled 
face, beholding as in a mirror the glorious bright- 
ness of the Lord, have been transformed after the 
same image.^ 

It is to the apostles, then, that we are now to look 
for authentic information respecting the design and 
meaning of the Mosaic economy, and concerning the 
relation in which christians stand to every part of its 
handwriting of ordinances. To the testimony which 
they have delivered, we are called upon to bring 
every religious doctrine or practice founded on infe- 
rential reasonings, drawn from the Old Testament 
state of things, and, by this standard, '' to prove all 
things, holding fast that which is good." It is by 
this test, accordingly, that we now propose to examine 
the practice of using the Judaical decalogue as the 
rule of christian obedience. 

It is the express declaration of the apostle Paul, 

' II. Corinthians iii. 12-18. 



182 

that the believers of the gospel are " delivered from 
the law/' and are no longer under Moses, but under 
a dispensation of free favour and rich mercy ; they 
have "become dead to the law by the body of Christ" 
and have been " married to another, even to him who 
is raised from the dead." They are no longer " under 
the law but under grace'' Of what law is it that the 
apostle speaks thus ? That it is of the law of Moses, 
seems to be indisputable, for, in the context (evidently 
referring to the Jewish believers) he says, " I speak to 
them that know the law." The point then, we require 
to ascertain, is simply this : did Paul, by the term law, 
mean the Mosaic law as a whole, or only a portion of 
it ? in other words, did he mean that christians are 
delivered from the Mosaic institution, viewing it as a 
whole dispensation, or only from the civil and cere- 
monial part of it in contradistinction from that part 
which is moral ? This important question calls for a 
somewhat detailed examination. 

That the civil and ceremonial part of the Mosaic 
law has been abrogated by the introduction of the 
gospel, is, on all hands, admitted : that every moral 
precept retains its obligation under the christian 
dispensation, is, also, by no sober thinking man, ever 
denied. These two leading points may be laid 
down as indubitably established. The law has been 
" disannulled" and set aside, it being " weak and un- 
profitable, and making nothing perfect." As every 
moral precept, however, which Moses specifies, was 



183 

obligatory on men prior to its promulgation in the 
law, it continues, from its own nature, to remain in 
force after the Jewish economy has been brought to 
its appointed termination. What then is the pre- 
cise meaning of the apostolic statements, respecting 
the relation in which Christ's disciples now stand 
to the law of Moses ? In answering this question, 
it is of importance to keep in mind, that these state- 
ments have a special reference to the believers of the 
gospel, and were not meant to apply to mankind in 
general. The letters in which the declarations respect- 
ing the disannulling of the law are contained, are 
addressed, not to men indiscriminately, but to persons 
who had embraced the divine revelation of mercy, and 
who thus stood in the new relation to their Maker, of 
redeemed and adopted children, "justified by faith, 
and having peace with God through the Lord Jesus 
Christ."^ The subject of which the inspired writers 
treat, is not the grounds of moral obligation, but the 
temporary character of the Mosaic economy, and the 
entire deliverance of Christ's people from all its hand- 
writing of ordinances, its rigorous penalties, and bur- 
densome ceremonies. The relation in which man 
stands to his Maker, and the grounds of his responsi- 
bility in the possession of natural faculties, and of 
opportunities for their exercise, are questions entirely 
apart from the relation in which christians now stand 

^ Romans v. 1. 



184 

to the decalogue, and to the other national laws 
contained "in the book of ordinances." Owing, 
however, to the adoption, by certain scholastic theo- 
logians, of this code of laws as the rule and standard 
of christian obedience, these two questions have fre- 
quently been confounded at the expense of darkening 
and perplexing, both the one and the other. 

According to these divines, the rule which God 
has revealed to man for his obedience, is the moral 
law, and this law they affirm " is summarily compre- 
hended in the ten commandments." Proceeding on 
this assumption, they identify the decalogue with the 
grounds of moral obligation, and represent it as 
constituting the permanent rule of christian duty. 
They conceive, that while Christ by his death 
abrogated the ceremonial law, he also fulfilled the 
moral in its precepts and penalties, and retained it 
as the rule of obedience for his people. By 
the moral law, they understand the decalogue, and 
their notion is, that though believers are not now 
under the law, to obtain justification by obeying it, the 
ten commandments continue to be equally binding 
under the christian, as they were under the preced- 
ing economy. In this way they imagine they are 
placing the interests of christian morality on a sure 
foundation, and protecting them effectually, from 
every approach and inroad of Antinomian doctrine. 

There are two leading points, assumed on this 
system of doctrine, which call for examination. 



185 

First. — That the moral law is summarily compre- 
hended in the ten commandments. Second. — that 
the decalogue has been constituted the permanent 
rule of christian obedience. 

With regard to the first of these points, it is 
certain, that it is nowhere on record, that Christ or 
his apostles ever taught, that the law, promulgated 
to the Jewish nation at Mount Sinai, included the 
whole of human duty ; neither does it appear that 
they, at any time, stated that this code of laws 
constitutes the foundation of moral obligation. The 
foundation of human duty, it is obvious, is to be 
found not in the Sinaitic covenant, but in the na- 
ture of God, and in the nature of man, and in 
the relation which necessarily exists between the 
Creator and the being whom he has created. As 
the duties which thus naturally arise from the 
relation in which man stands to God, and from 
the relation in which men stand to each other, are 
imprinted on the human conscience, they are inde- 
pendent of every written code of laws, and continue, 
from their own nature, under every dispensation of 
religion, to be immutable, and universal in their 
obligation. These principles are uniformly recog- 
nized in the christian scriptures ; for the inspired 
writers proceed on the assumption, that the duties 
they involve, must necessarily be recognized by the 
human conscience, being interwoven with the whole 
constitution of man as a moral and accountable 

B B 



186 

being. It is this natural law of conscience, and 
that distinction between right and wrong which 
conscience points out, that the apostles, it is to be 
observed, uniformly state to be the foundation of 
human responsibility, and not the political law of 
Judea. The apostle Paul for instance, affirms, that 
the Gentiles, who did not possess any written law, 
were a law unto themselves ; for, while without a 
law, they, doing by nature the things contained in 
the law, gave evidence of its efficacy written upon 
their hearts : their conscience also bearing testimony, 
and their reasonings between one another when they 
advance or repel accusations.^ To the same purpose, 
he speaks of those who commit sin, " knowing that 
they who do such things are worthy of death."^ This 
law, written upon man's heart, includes every moral 
precept specified in the decalogue ; it embraces, 
moreover, every precept implied in the great princi- 
ples of the love of God and our neighbour, and 
extends, consequently, to the use of every faculty 
with which man has been endowed, to the exercise 
of his inmost thoughts, and to the performance of all 
his actions. 

It is deserving of notice, that the two great com- 
mandments, the love of God, and our neighbour, are 
not directly propounded in the decalogue, though 



Rom. ii. 14, 15. *" Rom. i. 32. 



187 

they were elsewhere expressly enjoined by Moses 
himself. The first is enjoined Deut. vi. 5, the 
other, Levit. xix. 18 ; and it does not appear, that 
they formed any part of the national code of the 
Jewish civil and religious polity. In the New Tes- 
tament, these two commandments are represented 
as comprehending, not only the decalogue, but the 
whole sum of moral obligation. Paul says, " He 
that loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the law," and 
''that love is the fulfilling of the law." ''All the 
law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, that thou 
shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." The same 
truth is stated by Jesus himself — " Thou shalt love 
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy 
soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and 
great commandment. And the second is like unto 
it. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On 
these two commandments hang all the law and the 
prophets." In these two commandments, the moral 
law may doubtless, with propriety, be said to be 
summarily comprehended : the assumption, that it is 
comprehended in the ten commandments, seems, 
however, to be alike incorrect and unfounded. The 
decalogue was a code of national law, in which 
moral and positive precepts stood side by side, all 
of which were enforced by arguments and motives 
that had a peculiar reference to that people to whom 
they were delivered. Instead. of it being correct, 
then, that the moral law is summarily comprehended 



188 



in the ten commandments, we conceive it is much 
more correct to say, that every one of these com- 
mandments that is moral in its nature, is compre- 
hended in the moral law. 

The other point assumed in the Westminster 
system of doctrine, namely, that the decalogue was 
designed to constitute the permanent rule of christian 
obedience, appears also to be destitute of any legiti- 
mate scriptural proof. Although it is quite true, 
that every moral precept contained in the decalogue, 
continues in force, it is to be considered, that this 
code of laws was delivered to the Je\^ish nation to 
serve as the instrument of their civil and religious 
polity. Even such of the statutes of that theocratic go- 
vernment, as were moral in themselves, had a peculiar 
reference to the state and condition of the people, 
as a nation delivered from Egyptian captivity, taken 
into covenant wdth God, and carefully kept in a state 
of separation from every other people in the world. 
Admitting therefore, that a considerable portion of the 
decalogue is of a moral nature, it seems, nevertheless, 
to be an extremely unwarrantable use of this code of 
national law, to extract it, without any direction to 
do so, from the other parts of the Mosaic economy, 
and to incorporate it with the gospel. 

It is to be remembered, that the Mosaic economy 
was, essentially, a national dispensation of reli- 
gion — a dispensation adapted in divine wisdom to 
the character and circumstances of a people that had 



189 

long been in bodily bondage, and in a state of great 
mental uncultivation ; and who, accordingly, not- 
withstanding their miraculous deliverance from 
Egypt, and the numerous solemn warnings they 
afterwards received, were constantly shewing a dis- 
position to relapse into the idolatrous practices of the 
heathen world around them. When that line of 
Abraham's posterity, that inherited the promise of 
giving birth to the Messiah, was rescued from 
Egyptian slavery, they were organized into '^ a king- 
dom of priests, a holy nation," that is, a nation 
separated from all others. Of this nation, Jehovah, 
in condescension to the people's weakness, and to 
the infancy of their religious knowledge, became the 
tutelary Deity, tlieir God, the God of their fathers, 
the God of Abraham, of Isaac^ and of Jacob. To 
this people, thus taken into covenant^ there was de- 
livered a national code of laws, embracing a system 
of religious worship and civil polity, adapted to their 
theocratic government, and their peculiar situation 
as the inheritors of the promise of redemption. That 
the decalogue was given to the Israelites, to 
serve as their immutable code of national law in the 
land of promise ; and, that a leading design of it 
was to distinguish them from other nations, is expli- 
citly stated by Moses, when exhorting the people to 
yield the divine statutes and judgments a proper 
obedience. ''Behold I have taught you statutes 
and judgments even as the Lord thy God commanded 



190 

me, that ye should do so in the land, whither ye go 
to possess it. Keep, therefore and do them, for this 
is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of the 
nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, 
surely this great nation is a wise and understanding 
people."' 

Let the decalogue be viewed in its original ap- 
plication to the circumstances of this people ; and its 
peculiar and exclusive adaptation to the character of 
the government with which it was incorporated, can- 
not fail to appear. It kept them in mind of the mira- 
culous interference of Jehovah in their behalf; and 
it was enforced by promises and threatenings which 
implied the constant care and superintendance of 
Him who was the supreme head of their government, 
political as well as religious. The preface affixed to 
it, " I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out 
of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bond- 
age ;" the responsible connexion stated to exist 
between fathers and their posterity, to the third and 
fourth generation ; the promise of long life in the 
land of Canaan ; the prohibition against coveting 
male and female slaves ; all these, and various other 
injunctions and provisions, seem unequivocally to 
indicate, that it was designed exclusively for the 
Israelitish nation. Its legitimate application to any 
other people, and especially to the spiritual subjects 

' Deuteronomy iv. 6. 



191 

of the kingdom of heaven is, indeed, wholly incon- 
ceivable, inasmuch as its injunctions are enforced by 
arguments, the force of vs^hich arise entirely from the 
relation in which the nation stood to Jehovah as their 
deliverer from Egyptian slavery, as their tutelary 
deity, and the supreme head of their civil and reli- 
gious polity. The notion of the Westminster Assem- 
bly, that the decalogue was designed to constitute 
the permanent rule of christian obedience, seems 
therefore, to be palpably erroneous ; being manifestly 
founded on an entire misapprehension of its contents, 
and of their original application and design. 

On whose authority has it been then, we must be 
allowed to ask, that this national code of laws has 
been separated at all from the other parts of the old 
covenant, and enforced on the subjects of the new? 
Certainly not upon that of Christ, or his apostles : 
for this practice is never once enjoined or recognized 
in any part of the New Testament writings. On the 
contrary, it is the express declaration of the apostle 
Paul, that christians " are not under the law but 
under grace :" that they are delivered from it entirely, 
having become " dead to it by the body of Christ." It 
is wholly arbitrary to assume, that, in these statements, 
Paul speaks merely of the ritual and ceremonial 
observances of the Jewish religion. All the prescrip- 
tions of the law, it is to be remembered, whether 
moral or cerem.onial, were enforced by the same 
temporal sanctions, on every subject of the old 



192 

covenant, and constituted the rule of the Jewish civil 
as well as religious polity, at the very time the 
apostle wrote. When treating, accordingly, of the 
relation in which the believers of the gospel 
now stand to the Mosaic institution, Paul never 
makes any distinction between precepts as moral or 
ceremonial, but simply states, that christians, as such, 
are no longer under the law, but under a dispensa- 
tion of free favour and mercy. 

The question, as was formerly remarked, is not 
whether Paul means that the moral precepts speci- 
fied in the law, are abrogated by the introduction of 
the gospel : the relation that exists between man and 
his Maker, remains doubtless undissolved, and the 
moral obligations which this relation implies, are in- 
dependent of every handwriting of ordinances con- 
tained in the Mosaic institution : as the moral precepts 
incorporated in that national economy were binding 
prior to its introduction, it is indubitable that they 
continue to be binding subsequent to its abrogation. 
Paul, however, is not speaking of the grounds of 
moral obligation, but of the deliverance of Christ's 
people from the rigorous prescriptions and condem- 
natory sentence of the law. This sentence was 
"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all 
things written in the book of the law to do them." 
It is quite true, that the things written in the book 
of the law, embraced precepts of a moral as well as 
others of a ceremonial nature, but the apostle never 



193 

intimates that he refers to one part of the law more 
than to another. As, therefore, he uniformly speaks 
of the law without any particular limitation, or any 
distinction of its duties, the conclusion seems to 
be inevitable, that he speaks of it as a whole — 
as a national covenant, all the precepts of which, 
whether moral or ceremonial, were alike obliga- 
tory, and enforced alike, by sanctions of the same 
solemn description. That this is the natural sense 
of the term law, used in this connexion, is too obvi- 
ous to admit of any dispute : and, except we admit 
that this was the sense in which Paul designed 
it to be understood, we must do a constant violence 
to the natural import of some of the plainest decla- 
rations contained in the sacred volume. 

The conclusion at which we have arrived, namely, 
that the apostle means by the term the law, the 
Mosaic institution as a whole, and not merely a part 
of it, receives a strong corroboration from various 
passages which occur in his leading epistles. It is 
his great doctrine, which he takes every opportunity 
of inculcating, that Christ is '^ the end of the law 
for justification to every one who believed on him :" 
and that all who thus acquiesced in the divine testi- 
mony concerning Jesus, were " not under the law but 
under grace." '' Ye are become dead to the law by 
the body of Christ." " We are delivered from the law, 
that being dead under which we were held." These 
statements seem very plainly to import that christians 

c c 



194 



have nothing to do with the law of Moses as respects 
the rule of their obedience : that there exists between 
it and them no connexion, inasmuch as every pre- 
cept has been disannulled, in so far as it was binding 
because Moses commanded it. In the beginning of 
the chapter from which the two last passages are 
cited, Paul illustrates his meaning by the example of a 
woman loosed from the law of marriage by the death 
of her husband; he states, that though the woman 
would be deemed an adulteress, who took another 
husband while her first was living, yet, as at the death 
of this husband she was made free from the law of 
marriage, so she would be no adulteress though she 
married again. In like manner, says he, are chris- 
tians discharged from the law through the body of 
Christ, and married to him who was raised from the 
dead. In the prosecution of his subject the Apostle 
emphatically asks, " What shall we say then ? Is the 
law sin ? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin but 
by the law : for I had not known lust, except the 
law had said, thou shalt not covet." Now this is the 
same law of which he was previously speaking, when 
he states that believers are **^ delivered from the law," 
and loosed from its obligation, precisely as a woman 
is discharged from the obligation of the law of mar- 
riage, by the death of her husband. As then, this 
precept adduced by Paul to show how he was con- 
vinced of sin, is one of the moral precepts prescribed 
by Moses ; the proposition, that when speaking of 



195 

the law, he speaks of it as a whole, without any 
distinction of its duties, seems, by this passage alone, 
to be, beyond all question determined. 

The same important truth of the entire abolition of 
the law, is stated with great clearness and force in 
diflPerent parts of the epistle to the Galatians,^ in the 
epistle to the Ephesians,^ and in that to the Colos- 
sians."" In these and other similar passages it is 
declared, that Christ hath blotted out the handwriting 
of ordinances, having nailed it to his cross, and has 
thus broken down the partition wall which kept Jew 
and Gentile asunder. The law of commandments, 
with its ordinances, is thus shewn to be wholly abo- 
lished through the body of Christ. That the deca- 
logue, as well as the ceremonial institutions of Moses, 
was a law of commandments, contained in ordinan- 
ces, is indisputable ; that it was the law as a whole, 
which formed that wall of partition, which was 
broken down by Christ, is not less certain ; it seems 
necessarily to follow, that when Paul states, that 
Christ "hath blotted out the handwriting of ordi- 
nances," and " hath taken it away, having nailed it 
to his cross," he means the entire abolition of the law 
on the introduction of the gospel. 

In the epistle to the Hebrews, it is stated, that the 
believers of the gospel are not brought to receive the 
law from Mount Sinai, but are come to Mount Sion ; 

■^ See Gal. iii. 19-25. iv. 1—7. v. 1 

' Eph. ii. 14, 15. " Col. ii. 13, 14, 



196 

they are not come to a mountain spread all over 
and burning with fire, and to blackness, and dark- 
ness, and tempest, and a noise of words, which 
the hearers intreated might not be addressed to 
them : they are come to Mount Sion, to the city of 
the living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem, to Jesus 
the mediator of the new covenant, and to the 
blood of sprinkling, which speaketh better things 
than the blood of Abel.° In a similar way, through- 
out the whole of this important epistle, are " the two 
coven an ts"° strikingly contrasted ; the one from 
Mount Sinai, engendering fear and bondage ; the 
other, the Jerusalem which is above, the begetter of a 
spirit of love and of christian liberty. " There is, 
verily," says the apostle, ^^ a disannulling of the com- 
mandment going before, for the weakness and unpro- 
fitableness thereof; for the law made nothing per- 
fect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by 
which we draw nigh to God.''^ Those who have learnt 
in this new way to draw nigh unto God, receive the 
law of their obedience no more from Moses, but 
from Him who addresses them from heaven, as well 
pleased for the sake of his Son ; and who has taught 
them to serve him, not with the slavish fear that 
characterized the subjects of the old covenant, but 
with the filial confidence of children, and in the 
generous spirit of that liberty, with which Christ has 
made his people free. 

" Heb. xii. 18-24. ° ,Gal. iv. 24. p Heb. vii. 18. 



197 

These, and various other passages, according to 
their simple and unstrained import,obviously imply the 
entire setting aside of the Mosaic law on the introduc- 
tion of the gospel. The notion, that Paul meant that 
the distinction between the ceremonial observances 
of the law, and that part of it which is moral, should 
be made by those to whom he wrote, seems to be 
destitute, not only of all direct scriptural proof, 
but of all colour of rational probability. The apos- 
tle, it is to be borne in mind, never speaks of the 
law as moral, in distinction from its national cha- 
racter and design ; for the decalogue itself was 
not merely a religious rule, it was promulgated for 
the express purpose of constituting the permanent 
national law of Judea. It was as a whole institu- 
tion, in which precepts of a moral nature were inter- 
spersed with others purely positive and ceremonial, 
that the law was delivered to the Israelitish nation, 
and, it was as a whole also, that it received, in Christ's 
death, its appointed fulfilment and abrogation. At 
the very time when the apostle was writing these 
letters to the christian churches, the decalogue con- 
tinued to be enforced as the national law of Judea 
on the Jewish believers themselves ; for though they 
had, as christians, become dead to the law by the 
body of Christ, they continued under a civil obliga- 
tion to comply with all its injunctions, whether moral 
or ceremonial, until the political dissolution of the 
Jewish government. The Gentile converts were 



198 

exempted^ however, from this obhgation — from the 
prescriptions of the decalogue, as well as from every 
other precept, in as far as they were binding because 
found in the law of Moses ; and were directed ^^ to 
keep no such thing." That by the term the lazv, 
then, the apostles meant the law as a whole, and not 
merely a portion of it, seems to be established be- 
yond all reasonable dispute. 

The grounds of moral obligation being wholly 
independent of the Mosaic law, it is manifest, we 
may safely admit the unstrained and obvious meaning 
of the apostolic statements, respecting its entire 
abolition, without endangering, in any degree, the 
interests of christian morality. Every moral precept 
specified in the decalogue, as well as in every other 
part of the sacred volume, is, from its own nature, as 
has already been remarked, of indispensable and uni- 
versal obligation. This was true anterior to the pro- 
mulgation of the ten commandments ; and it continues 
to be true after the Mosaic economy, has been brought 
to an end. Though no precept is now binding, because 
Moses commanded it, it is indubitable, that, as the 
law of conscience was not introduced by Moses, so 
neither have the moral obligations which the existence 
of this law implies, ceased to be in force now that the 
law of Moses is done away with. While, however, 
in as far as the grounds of moral obligation are con- 
cerned, the solution of the question it was proposed 
to consider, is thus of trivial consequence, its deter- 



199 

ruination is of great moment as respects the influence 
which it naturally exerts over our views of various 
important collateral questions. If Paul's language 
respecting the law be interpreted in its natural and 
unstrained sense^ the reasoning contained in the 
apostolical epistles^ appears luminous and conclusive; 
if, on the other hand^ the important doctrine of the 
entire abolition of the law be explained away or lost 
sight of, there is reason to believe that a consider- 
able portion of the christian scriptures can never 
be thoroughly understood. 

In the New Testament, the different dispensations 
of Judaism and Christianity, instead of being blended 
together as if they were the same system of religion 
under different names, are represented as being 
wholly distinct, and their different natures are de- 
signedly contrasted in order to illustrate their respec- 
tive characters and designs. " The law was given 
by Moses, hwt grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." 
Though the former made nothing perfect, and was 
not designed to acquaint men how a sinner could 
obtain forgiveness and acceptance with the righteous 
Jehovah, it subserved important purposes peculiar to 
that stage of the progress of the scheme of redemp- 
tion : it fulfilled the duties of a pedagogue, gradu- 
ally conducting the posterity of Abraham from a 
state of infantile religious knowledge, to that Messiah 
in whose advent and finished work, it received its 
verification and completion. When, however, the 



200 

glad tidings of pardon and peace with God, 
through this Messiah, were, subsequent to his resur- 
rection, pubhcly proclaimed, those who gave credit 
to the divine testimony concerning the person and 
work of Christ, were declared to be " no longer under 
a pedagogue ; they had become the children of God, 
by faith in Jesus Christ." The allegorical parallel 
drawn by Paul between the son of the bondmaid 
and the son of the freewoman, in the epistle to the 
Galatians, is designed to illustrate the different 
natures of the two dispensations ; or, in other words 
of '^ the two covenants," the old covenant of Moses, 
and the new one ratified by Christ's death. The 
former from Mount Sinai, being a dispensation of 
servitude and fear, gendered bondage : the latter, 
the Jerusalem which is above, being free, begets 
children of promise, freed from the bondage of the 
law, and capacitated to enjoy the privilege of gospel 
liberty. The one was a shadow of good things to 
come, the other the substance of those things : the 
law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a 
better hope did, by which christians now draw 
nigh to God. 

To all who have been taught to appreciate the 
value of the liberty of the gospel, it must be appa- 
rent, that the modern practice of dragging the deca- 
logue from its appropriate situation in the old cove- 
nant of Moses, and introducing it as the rule of 
christian obedience, is not only destitute of all 



201 

scriptural authority, but wholly inconsistent with the 
nature of those principles which, in the New Testa- 
ment, are represented as influencing and regulating 
the thoughts and actions of the believers of the 
gospel. The children of the promise are enjoined 
not to undervalue that freedom from the servile 
bondage of the law, to which they are begotten, but 
to hold it fast, stedfastly resisting every one who at- 
tempted to entangle them in its dispiriting servitude. 
They are not taught to view a literal adherence to 
the minute prescriptions of any written code of laws 
like the Judaical decalogue, as the due fulfilment of 
their christian obligations. Having been all " taught 
to know the Lord," they have all had the divine law 
written upon their hearts, not indeed, ^^ with ink," 
or as the decalogue was written, ^^in tables of stone," 
but "in fleshly tables," and in the language of 
ardent love and profound gratitude. This knowledge 
of the Lord, and that love and gratitude which it 
naturally engenders, all contribute to animate the 
subjects of the new covenant to devote them- 
selves unreservedly to his service who redeemed them, 
and thus, effectually furnish them with the motives 
and principles of christian obedience. 

It is deserving of notice, that the objection which 
the introduction of the unauthorized practice in 
question, has, apparently, been designed to obviate, 
namely, that the doctrine of the entire abolition of 
the law, affords no security against the freedom of 

D D 



202 

the gospel being abused to licentious purposes, has 
been anticipated by Paul himself, who, it is to be 
noticed, in replying to it, does not attempt to remove 
this apprehension of danger, by retracting any part 
of the declaration, that christians " are no longer 
under the law but under grace." " What shall we 
say then ?" he asks, '' shall we continue in sin be- 
cause grace abounds ?" What is the answer ? ^^By 
no means." And on what grounds is it, that the 
apostle gives this emphatically negative reply ? Is it 
by stating that the decalogue, or some other part of 
the Mosaic dispensation is still in force, and has been 
constituted the permanent rule of christian duty ? 
No. Paul was addressing persons who had given 
credit to the apostolic testimony concerning the 
grace of God, that had been manifested in Christ 
Jesus, and which had abounded to sinners of every de- 
gree and name. As these persons were capable of feel- 
ing the force of christian motives, he appeals at once 
to their sense of gratitude : and, by calling to their 
recollection, their union to Christ in his death and 
resurrection, affectingly impresses on their minds, the 
deep obligations arising from their belief of the 
great facts of the gospel. They were become dead 
to the law by the body of Christ, and dead conse- 
quently to sin, not only as respected its sentence, 
but as respected its service also. Their connexion 
with it being dissolved, instead of serving it as they 
formerly had done, prior to their union to Christ, 



203 

they ought now, (he goes on to show,) to be wholly 
*^ the servants of righteousness." " How shall we 
that are dead to sin, live any longer therein ? Know 
ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into 
Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? There- 
fore we are buried with him by baptism into death : 
that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by 
the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk 
in newness of life. For if we have been planted 
together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also 
in the likeness of his resurrection. Knowing this 
also, that our old man is crucified with him, that the 
body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we 
should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed 
from sin.'"i '' Ye are not under the law but under 
grace. What then ? shall we sin because we are 
not under the law but under grace ? God forbid. 
Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves ser- 
vants to obey, his servants ye are whom ye obey ; 
whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto 
righteousness. But God be thanked, that ye were 
the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the 
heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 
Being then made free from sin, ye became the ser- 
vants of righteousness : and now, being made free 
from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your 
fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting hfe."' 

■5 Rom. vi. 3-7. ' Rom. vi. 15-22. 



204 

Thus by calling to their recollection their union to 
Christ in his death and resurrection, represented to 
them in their baptism, and by reminding them at 
the same time, that the profession they had made ^^of 
putting on the Lord Jesus," clearly implied, that 
their connexion with sin, both as respected its sen- 
tence and service, was done away with, does the 
apostle impress on their minds the affecting conside- 
ration, that christians are no longer their own, but 
are bound by the strongest ties to serve Him unre- 
servedly, who, by his own blood, has redeemed them. 
It is in this manner that our great apostle effectually 
precludes the captioas objection, that ignorant and 
foolish men have, in every age, been ready to adduce 
against the doctrine of the free grace, and complete 
justification of the gospel. Instead of trying to 
remove the apprehension of these doctrines being 
frequently perverted and abused, by calling to their 
aid the w^ak and beggarly elements of Judaism, he 
simply exhorts christians " to walk in the spirit" of 
revealed truth, and ^' to obey from the heart that 
mould of doctrine, into which they had been cast." 
By reminding them of the revealed mercy of God 
in Christ Jesus, and of all the affecting considerations 
connected with the scheme of redemption, he be- 
seeches them to present their bodies as a living sa- 
crifice, holy, well-pleasing to God ; and shows them, 
that this is their reasonable service. Thus does Paul 
teach us that it is the devout remembrance of the 



205 

great facts of the gospel, which most effectually pre- 
serves in its full force, that law of love and gratitude 
which, as it is written upon the heart of every be- 
liever of the gospel, so is it at the foundation of all 
acceptable christian obedience. 

It seems to be thus very manifest, that the modern 
practice of dragging the decalogue from its natural 
situation in the old covenant of Moses, and intro- 
ducing it into the gospel dispensation, as the rule of 
christian duty, is not only at variance with the decla- 
rations of the apostles respecting the entire abolition 
of the law, but also wholly inconsistent with the nature 
of those principles, which in the New Testament are 
represented as influencing and regulating the conduct 
of Christ's disciples. In this unauthorized practice, 
the relic of an ignorant age, the doctrine of a chris- 
tian sabbath appears to have had its origin ; 
and to its credulous retention, the continued preva- 
lence of this Sabbatarian doctrine seems to be in 
a considerable measure attributable. The doctrine 
of a christian sabbath, it is obvious, is not an insu- 
lated point having no relation to other scriptural 
questions; it formed an integral part of all those 
systems of divinity, which the Puritan divines con- 
structed in adaptation to that worldly system of 
ecclesiastical polity, which they wished to intro- 
duce ; and it has been a good deal owing to the 
mutual support which several of the unscriptural 
notions broached by these Judaizing divines, have 



206 



yielded to each other, that they have been al- 
lowed so long to prevail in the v^orld. As the 
Puritan doctrine of the existing obligation of the 
fourth commandment, seemed naturally to follow 
from the retention of the decalogue as the rule of 
christian duty, in like manner, the practice of using 
this national code of laws as the standard of obe- 
dience under the gospel, has prevented the full re- 
ception of the apostolic doctrine of the entire aboli- 
tion of the law. It is incredible, that the distinct 
and repeated declarations of Paul on this point, 
should have been so long and so studiously evaded, 
had the Puritan doctrine of a christian sabbath not 
stood in the way. Because, however, it was plainly 
perceived, that, if the full meaning of the apostolic 
statements on this head were admitted, the Sabbata- 
rian doctrine would be entirely subverted, it was 
found necessary to have recourse to unnatural and 
unauthorized distinctions between one part of the 
law and another, by the help of which, the natural 
and unstrained meaning of the apostle's language 
has continued to be explained away, and seriously 
misrepresented. 

Thus have these two practices, the use of the de- 
calogue as the rule of christian duty, and the obser- 
vance of a weekly sabbath, served to support each 
other, and to perpetuate in concert, scriptural mis- 
conception and error. It is not to be doubted, that 
in numerous and various ways, these unscriptural 



207 

practices have greatly impeded the progress of 
divine truth. They have contributed to retain the 
professors of Christianity under the dominion of human 
creeds and scholastic schemes of theology, which 
have too long been allowed to usurp that place which 
exclusively belongs to the apostles of Jesus Christ. 
They have led men to confound things which mate- 
rially differ ; — the old covenant of Moses, and the 
new covenant ratified by Christ's death ; and to inter- 
mix Judaism with Christianity, in a manner entirely 
at variance with the peculiar relation in which they 
stand to each other. According to the apostles, 
Judaism was introductory to Christianity; and having 
received in Christ's advent and finished work its 
appointed fulfilment, is now entirely done away with. 
According to the system of doctrine laid down by 
the school of divines referred to, they are merely 
different dispensations of the same " covenant of 
grace or redemption," a covenant supposed to have 
been made in eternity, but which, as it is not once 
mentioned, either in the Old Testament or the New, 
we may safely pronounce to be purely a figment of 
human invention. Viewed through this fictitious 
medium, the old and new covenants so strikingly 
contrasted by the apostles, are represented as 
being substantially the same ; and the language 
of the inspired writers respecting the abolition of 
the law, is rendered perplexingly ambiguous, re- 
quiring to be constantly understood in a sense at 



208 

variance with its unstrained and most obvious import, 
while some of the most important reasoning contained 
in Paul's writings, is seriously enervated and obscured. 
When, however, w^e simply follow the natural plan 
of interpretation, that the natural sense of the lan- 
guage was the meaning designed to he expressed hy 
the writers, the reasoning contained in the apostolic 
epistles appears uniformly consistent and luminous ; 
and all the various dispensations of religion spoken 
of in the Old Testament, are seen to harmonize in 
advancing that great scheme of redemption, the na- 
ture, as well as the completion of which, is first fully 
and clearly revealed in the New. 

The Old Testament revelation necessarily appear- 
ed very obscure and incomplete of itself ; for accom- 
panied, as it undoubtedly was, with manifold incon- 
trovertible evidences of divine authority, it did not 
receive its true interpretation or chief confirmation, 
until it terminated in the finished work of Jesus, the 
true Messiah. As in Christ's advent and death it 
received its designed verification, so now, having re- 
ceived this conclusive evidence, it furnishes in its 
turn, a most powerful and decisive testimony to the 
person and work of Him, the purpose of whose com- 
ing, it had previously, by types and carnal ordinances, 
adumbrated and foretold. As Judaism and Christi- 
anity, in this manner powerfully confirm each other, 
so do they furnish mutual illustrations of their 
respective characters and designs. The law received 



209 

its verification and fulfilment in the work of the 
Messiah^ who, by finishing the work given him to 
do, became the end of it for justification to every 
one who believed on his name. By means of the 
explications given by the apostles, of the carnal or- 
dinances of the law, we now distinctly perceive the 
meaning of those earthly figures and shadows, which 
were as a veil upon the face of Moses, under which 
the realities of the gospel were formerly concealed. 
Thus do we learn, that what the laiv^ could not ac- 
complish in that it was weak through the flesh, God 
hath by the gospel of his Son effected ; for He send- 
ing his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, a sin 
offering, condemned sin in the flesh ; that the right- 
eousness of the law might be fulfilled by those who 
have been taught to serve God no longer with a 
slavish fear, according to the letter of the law, but 
with the filial confidence becoming the subjects of 

^ It is usual, we are aware, to interpret the word law in this passage as de- 
noting merely the moral law : — that law written on man's heart, which consti- 
tutes the universal rule of duty to intelligent creatures. As the apostle, 
however, has been reasoning in the preceding context about the law of Moses, 
(that law which, he assumes, the individuals he was addressing were familiar 
with, " I speak to them that know the law,") it seems much more natural to 
interpret the expression as simply referring to the whole Mosaic dispensation, 
without any distinction of its duties ; and among these duties, it is to be remem- 
bered, the immutable principles of moral obligation were included. The term 
law is, no doubt, used in scripture with considerable latitude of signification ; 
but the scope of the context seldom or ever fails to point readily and distinctly 
to its precise intended application. Its primary meaning, namely, the authori- 
tative revelation of the will of a superior for the obedience of those under him, 
enters into all the senses in which it is employed. Thus we read, that where 

E E 



210 

gospel freedom^ — in the newness of the spirit of the 
law, even that grace and truth which came by Jesus 
Christ. 

" there is no law there is no transgression." In this primary sense, it is with 
evident propriety used to denote the whole revealed will of God as communi- 
cated to us in his word. See Psalm i. 2. xix. 7. cxix. passim ; and in the same 
original sense, the gentiles are stated to be without the law. Rom. ii. 14 ; that 
is, they were without any written revelation, and under no law save the natural 
law of conscience. In the New Testament, the usual application of the term is 
to the Mosaic institution as distinguished from the gospel, John i. 17. Acts xxv. 8. 
Gal. iii. 19 : and from this sense it naturally derived another, namely, a designa- 
tion for the Books of IMoses, in which the institutions of the Jewish economy 
were described in distinction from the other books of scripture. Thus Jesus 
said, " All things must be fulfilled that are written in the law of Moses, and in 
the Psalms, and in the Prophets concerning me ;" and to the same effect Paul 
states, that the method of a sinner's acceptance with God, revealed in the gospel, 
" is witnessed by the law and the prophets." 



SECTION VI. 

THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE MODERN SABBATH IS 
SUPPOSED TO REST, EXAMINED IN DETAIL. 

Here we might terminate the inquiry we proposed 
to institute, respecting the original design and ex- 
isting obligation of the sabbatical institution. From 
all the prescriptions of the law of Moses, from the law 
of the sabbath as well as from every other hand- 
wi'iting contained in the book of ordinances, chris- 
tians are declared to be wholly delivered. The 
gospel has disannulled the commandment going 
before : and though every moral precept the Mosaic 
law specifies, and all moral precepts whatever con- 
tinue from their own nature in force, there is no 
precept now binding merely on account of Moses 
having commanded it. As there has been no sabba- 
tical observance prescribed by Christ or his apostles, 
we may warrant ably conclude, that the believers of 
the gospel are under no obligation to observe any 
one day as more holy than another. These are 
plainly the real points on which tllfe Sabbatarian 
question hinges : there are various other points, 
however, which it is usual to adduce, as having a 
bearing on the subject, that by some may be re- 
garded as requiring further consideration. 



212 

It is doubtless^ not a little surprising, that an 
observance so destitute of all legitimate scriptural 
proof, as the modern sabbath manifestly is, should 
have ever obtained a general prevalence in the world : 
and it seems not less so, that it should continue 
still to prevail among persons who profess to recog- 
nize no authority in matters of faith and practice, 
save the authority of the sacred volume. That the 
obligation of this observance continues to be un- 
hesitatingly recognized by the great bulk of the 
professedly christian community, is a fact too obvious 
to admit of being questioned : the precise grounds 
on which the duty is, by different persons, supposed 
to rest are, however, by no means so clear ; and are 
somewhat difficult to ascertain. With many, we 
apprehend, the general prevalence of the practice 
furnishes the chief and actual evidence on which 
they found their belief of its divine authority. They 
conceive it to be altogether incredible, that a doc- 
trine so generally believed by religious persons, 
should have obtained the prevalence it has done, if 
it had not been taught in the sacred writings. To 
vague notions of this kind, and especially to a con- 
fident but" btroneous persuasion entertained, of the 
universal pref^lence of the observance in all past 
ages, its credulous recognition at the present time 
is apparently principally to be attributed. There 
are many, again, who seem to think, that the ma- 
nifest and universally acknowledged expediency of 



213 

observing a weekly day of public rest^ is an unequi- 
vocal proof of the divine origin of the modern doc- 
trine. That the observance of the sabbath is indis- 
pensable to the interests of religion^ is regarded by 
these persons as a point not to be called in question : 
every argument, accordingly, which impugns the 
divine institution of this observance, is jealously 
watched, and strenuously opposed, being viewed as 
an attack upon the cause of christian piety. 

There are few errors, we apprehend, into which men 
are more apt to fall, in the formation of their religious 
opinions, than that of allowing their predilections 
and prejudices in favour of a certain conclusion to 
bias their minds, in the interpretation of scriptural 
evidence. When a person is once firmly convinced 
that a particular conclusion is essential to his own 
religious well-being, or to that of mankind in general, 
there is no degree of evidence in favour of opposite 
sentiments, short of absolute demonstration, which 
his mind, under the powerful impulse that is felt to 
adhere to its own prepossessions, will not resist. 
It is obvious too, that persons powerfully impressed 
with a conviction, that any religious object they are 
pursuing, is an undoubtedly good and i^Rrtant one, 
are not very apt to scrutinize with nroh care, the 
precise lawfulness of all the means which go to 
support it. This temptation to pursue the ac- 
complishment of a supposed good end by means, 
which, were it not for the laudable purpose to which 



214 

they are applied, would in themselves seem barely 
warrantable, is doubtless one of the most insidious, 
and at the same time one of the most powerful in- 
ducements to deal unfairly with evidence, to which 
the human mind is exposed.* That there is a con- 
siderable number of persons who are sincerely per- 
suaded, that the doctrine of a christian sabbath is 
supported by adequate scriptural evidence, we by no 
means wish to dispute : of the greater number of 
those however, who have professedly advocated this 
notion, it is to be observed, that they have assumed, 
with so great confidence, the indispensable necessity 
of the observance to the interests of religion, that 
they seem to have imagined, it was their bound en 
duty to discover every semblance of evidence that 
would contribute to support their own view of the 
subject. Their object, in discussing the question, ap- 
pears to have been, not so much to ascertain on which 
side the truth lay, as to collect and adduce arguments 
of all sorts and qualities, which might serve to con- 
firm their own previously formed opinions. As among 
the arguments which these ingenious advocates of 
the Puritoi sabbath have discovered, there occur 
several, o^^Bich there has hitherto been no suitable 
opportunity^m directly noticing, it may now be 
proper to consider, more particularly than we have 



' For an able illustration of tliis point see Whately's Errors of Romanism- 
Chap. " On Pious Frauds." 



215 

yet done, the validity of the grounds on which this 
doctrine is, in modern times, usually made to rest. 

I. — The most prevailing reason apparently for 
recognizing the authority of this observance, is the 
assumption, that the fourth commandment is of uni- 
versal and perpetual obligation. This command- 
ment required those to whom it was delivered, to 
remember the sabbath day to keep it holy ; and as 
the same obligation is considered to be still binding, 
it is supposed that this duty is complied with, by 
keeping the first day of the week as a holy sabbath. 

It is deserving of notice, that in the numerous 
publications which have appeared, treating of the 
'^ sanctification of the sabbath," the usual design 
of the writers has been simply to explain the duties 
required by the fourth commandment, and to en- 
force their careful observance, by the various pro- 
mises and threatenings by which the law was 
sanctioned under the Mosaic dispensation : the ob- 
ligation of the precept, and the transference of its 
duties from the seventh day to the first, have been 
almost invariably assumed to be settled points which 
admit of no dispute. ^^ 

It has already been shown that th^Hmmption on 
which this Sabbatarian doctrine is fflmded, is un- 
supported by any legitimate scriptural proof : it has 
also been shown, that the notion of the decalogue 
having been constituted the permanent rule of chris- 
tian duty, is not only at variance with the statements 



216 

of the apostles respecting the entire abolition of the 
law, but wholly inconsistent with the nature of chris- 
tian liberty, and with those principles of christian love 
and gratitude, which, in the New Testament, are 
represented as influencing the believers of the gospel. 
Were we to admit, however, that the perpetual 
obligation of the fourth commandment is a doctrine 
capable of scriptural proof, we should still be unable 
to discern in what way it can be warrantably in- 
ferred, that there arises from this commandment an 
obligation to sanctify the first day of the week, — a day 
to which its prescriptions never once refer. The fourth 
commandment expressly states that " the seventh day 
is the sabbath of the Lord thy God." To deduce, 
then, from a precept which specifies that the seventh 
day is the sabbath of Jehovah, an obligation to 
keep the first, or any other day holy, is surely not 
less presumptuous, than it is palpably illogical and 
absurd. It will be difficult to assign any reason for 
drawing from the contents of this commandment the 
inference, that the first day of the week ought to be 
sanctified, which would not be equally valid for de- 
ducing fr om th e same premises the conclusion, that 
the second^^kthird day of the week ought to be 
sanctified. sRt be warrantable to alter the pre- 
scriptions of a positive divine precept like this, by 
substituting another day altogether for the day 
specified in the precept, we may, on the same 
grounds, proceed to alter, at our own discretion. 



217 

every positive precept in the sacred volume, in 
accommodation to our own taste and convenience. 
Before, then, we can recognize an obligation to 
sanctify the first day of the week, in obedience to 
the fourth commandment, we require to be distinctly 
informed by what authority its duties have been 
transferred from the seventh day to the first : — we 
require to be informed, moreover, by what authority 
the duties prescribed in the commandment, the 
reasons assigned for its ordination, and the pe- 
nalty originally annexed to its violation, have 
been all either partially disregarded, or wholly set 
aside. 

The law of the sabbath, it is to be remem- 
bered, was originally delivered to the Israelites 
as '^ a kingdom of priests, a holy nation" — a 
people separated for peculiar purposes to God's 
service, and placed under his special care and 
protection : it was given to be ^' a sign," distinguish- 
ing this people from every other nation, and con- 
stituted part of that " middle wall of partition," 
which was ultimately "broken down" by Christ. 
As the distinction kept up between Jew and Gentile, 
by this " sign," and other ordinanfes, has been 
abolished by the introduction of the gospel, one of 
the special causes of its institution is, conse- 
quently, entirely removed. In addition to this, 
it is to be considered, that the observance of 
the sabbath was designed, among other reasons, 

F F 



218 

to commemorate the completion of the work of 
creation on the seventh day: it is impossible, 
therefore, that this purpose can be answered, if its 
duties be observed on any other day ; neither can 
any new reason for keeping this or any other sab- 
bath, be introduced, without divine authority. It 
is certain that there is no divine precept on record, 
enjoining the commemoration of the work of Cre- 
ation on the first day of the week, or authorizing 
the introduction of the commemoration of Christ's 
resurrection, or that of any similar event, as a 
reason for observing Sunday as a holy sabbath. 
The rigorous prescriptions of the sabbatical in- 
stitution, it is to be considered, moreover, were 
in entire accordance with the nature and design of 
the old covenant ; being adapted, in conjunction 
with the other Mosaic hand-writing of ordinances, 
to produce that servile frame of mind^ which was 
imposed as a yoke of bondage upon all under that 
dispensation, for purposes peculiar to the pedago- 
gical condition of the people under it. The ob- 
servance of the weekly sabbath, as a day of holy 
rest, was literally and strictly enforced on the whole 
population^*" "^o rigidly so, that the people were 
prohibited fr6?h " kindling a fire throughout their 
habitations upon the sabbath day ;"" and every 
violation of the law constituted a capital crime, 
subjecting the guilty person to the penalty of death."" 

" Exod. XXXV. 3. ^ Exod. xxxi. 15. — xxxv. 2. 



219 

All these things — the day specified in the command- 
ment, the rigorous prescriptions it enacts, the pe- 
nalty annexed to its violation, were every one of 
them strictly complied with, by that people to whom 
the ordinance was originally delivered ; and if the 
law continues to be still obligatory, it will not be 
easy to assign any valid reason for altering and ac- 
commodating its prescriptions to meet men's modern 
notions of convenience. 

Whatever other reasons then may be adduced in 
support of the modern sabbath, it seems to be utterly 
unwarrantable to infer its obligation from the fourth 
commandment. To maintain, indeed, that the sab- 
batical ordinance delivered to the Jewish nation is 
not abrogated, is to introduce the obligation of the 
whole Mosaic ritual ; for all the positive precepts of 
Moses are declared by Paul, to stand or fall on the 
same foundation. 

II. — In proof of the perpetuity of the sabbath, it 
has been alleged, that as this precept was spoken, to- 
gether with the other nine precepts of the decalogue, 
with an awful voice, from the midst of the thunders 
at Mount Sinai, and was written by the finger of 
God on one of the two tables of stone, fashioned by 
the hand of Jehovah himself, it is to be regarded as 
one of the commands of the moral law, and as 
binding accordingly on men of every age and 
country.^ 

y Dwight's Theology, Serm. CV. 



220 

It has already been shown, that the notion of the 
moral law being comprehended in the ten command- 
ments, is alike incorrect and unfounded. The deca- 
logue may, with propriety, be viewed as a summary 
of the political law of Judea, but all the circumstances 
connected with it — " the kingdom of priests/' to 
whom it was delivered, the peculiar motives by 
which it was prefaced, the particular promises and 
threatenings by which it was sanctioned, its con- 
trived adaptation to that theocratic polity with 
which it was incorporated, all forbid the supposition 
that it was designed to constitute the perpetual code 
of universal moral obligation, and much less the 
standard of gospel obedience. 

It seems to be entirely futile to adduce the extra- 
ordinary circumstances which attended the promul- 
gation of this code of laws, as a reason for regard- 
ing its prescriptions as being of universal and per- 
petual obligation. That it was ^^ by divine contri- 
vance and design," that the decalogue was writ- 
ten by the finger of Jehovah on tables of stone, 
is doubtless not to be questioned : this parti- 
cular design, however, we are to ascertain from 
legitimate scriptural evidence, and not from the 
conjectures of speculative divines. The reasons for 
the decalogue having been spoken with an awful 
and audible voice, from the midst of the thunderings 
and lightnings at Mount Sinai, we are distinctly 



221 

told, in the Epistle to the Hebrews :^ we are there 
taught too, that the believing Hebrews were not 
again brought to receive a law from Mount Sinai, but 
that they were now brought to Mount Sion, to Jesus 
the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood 
of sprinkling which speaketh better things than the 
blood of Abel. And elsewhere, we are instructed, 
that the subjects of this new covenant have their 
laws written no longer upon tables of stone, but 
upon the fleshly tablets of the heart."" Independent 
of these conclusive considerations, it is to be re- 
membered, that the words, " I am the Lord thy 
God who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, 
and out of the house of bondage," were written on 
the same tables of stone upon which the ten com- 
mandments were written. Now, though these words 
were very significant and impressive in their original 
application to the Israelites, it is not easy to see 
their meaning in reference to any other people. 

That every moral precept specified in the deca- 
logue is, from its own nature, of perpetual obligation, 
is on all hands admitted : it does not follow from 
this, however, that the fourth commandment is a 
portion of the moral law. If it be a part of the 
moral law, it must necessarily be moral in its own 
nature ; and the question, whether or not this is the 
case, is to be ascertained, not by indulging in con- 

Heb, xii, * 2 Cor. iii. 



222 

jectures about the design of the thunderings that 
accompanied its delivery, but only in the same way 
as we ascertain the nature of all other precepts 
whatever, namely, by the moral judgment of 
mankind. 

Clearly to conceive of the distinction that exists 
between moral and positive precepts, is of the last 
importance in all discussions of this nature. This 
distinction is neither subtle nor unsound, as some 
writers would represent it, with a view, apparently, 
of evading what they are unable, satisfactorily, to 
answer : it is plain and pertinent to the point in 
question ; and, existing as it does in the nature of 
things, except it be kept accurately in view, the 
mind must be greatly misled, by confounding things 
which materially differ in their nature; and the 
grounds and extent of human obligation must ever 
be very superficially and inaccurately understood. 
All duties are termed moral, it is to be remembered, 
which are right in themselves, and which^ on account 
of the human conscience recognizing them as being 
thus right, are of universal obligation, independent 
of any enactment. To love God, to do justly, to 
speak the truth, and similar obligations are, on 
this account, called moral duties. Those duties, on 
the other hand, are called positive, which derive 
their obhgation solely from their being commanded. 
The ordinance of the Lord's supper, for instance, is 
called a positive duty, because the particular use of 



223 

bread and wine prescribed in that ordinance, would 
not have been obligatory on Christ's disciples at all, 
except it had been specified and enjoined on them : 
thus, while moral duties are commanded, because 
they are right, — positive duties are right, solely 
because they are commanded. Whether then is the 
sanctification of the sabbath day, a precept of a 
moral or of a positive nature ? That the w^orship 
and service of the Divine Being is a moral obligation, 
is a truth consonant wdth the clearest dictates of the 
human conscience : that the sanctification, or setting 
apart of a determinate portion of time from a com- 
mon to a sacred use, must be a duty purely positive 
in its nature, seems to be a proposition not less clear 
and certain. The fourth commandment required 
the Jewish nation to remember the sabbath day to 
keep it holy, and expressly stated that the seventh 
day w^as the sabbath of Jehovah. Now that this 
was purely a positive enactment, seems to be indis- 
putable, inasmuch as the observance it prescribed 
became a duty, solely on account of the law having 
been promulgated. To sanctify a determinate por- 
tion of time is plainly not an obligation recognizable 
as right in itself apart from any revealed law, as all 
moral duties are. Antecedent to the promulgation 
of the law, enjoining the observance of the seventh 
day, so far as men's knowledge of the matter went, 
it must necessarily have appeared a matter of in- 
difference, wdiether the sixth, or the seventh, or the 



224 

eighth day was to be ordained a holy sabbath. As, 
therefore, an obhgation of this kind could not pos- 
sibly have been known without an express precept 
prescribing it, upon such a precept alone its whole 
obligation is manifestly founded. We conceive then, 
that as the law of Moses, and that law alone made 
it obligatory on the Jewish people, to keep the 
seventh day holy ; the observance of the sabbath 
day, prescribed in the fourth commandment, is a 
duty distinctly of a positive nature, and obligatory 
accordingly, on those alone on whom it has been 
enjoined. 

By some writers it has been maintained, that " the 
fourth commandment is of a moral nature no less 
than the others, and indispensable to all the children 
of Adam," on the ground that the ends for which 
they conceive the sabbath was ordained, namely, " to 
give the labouring classes of mankind an opportu- 
nity of resting from toil, to furnish an opportunity 
to fallen man of acquiring holiness, and of obtaining 
salvation, are equally necessary to every child of 
Adam."^ By others it has been supposed, that '^ the 
commandment is moral as to the duty, seeing there 
must be a time appointed for the service of God, 
and ceremonial only as to the specified day ; so that 
it is of a mixed or middle nature ;" the part which 
continues to be obligatory, these persons imagine, 

'' Dwight's Theology. 



225 

is the moral law ; the Mosaic part alone, as they 
conceive, having been abrogated on the introduction 
of the gospel. • 

The first of these opinions appears to rest upon 
very fallacious grounds. That the sabbath was in- 
stituted, with a view of permanently promoting all 
the important purposes, which, by this class of wri- 
ters, are confidently ascribed to its original design, 
is a pure gratuitous assumption, incapable of any 
legitimate scriptural proof. Admitting however, 
that it could be shown, that the institution was de- 
signed to promote, in every age of the world, these 
and similar important purposes, it would not neces- 
sarily follow that the commandment is, on this ac- 
count, of a moral nature. However important and 
general may be the ends, which the observance of a 
sabbatical institution may be adapted to promote, 
the nature of the precept, as moral or positive, is not 
determined by circumstances of this kind. If the 
prescription to keep the seventh day more holy than 
any other day, had been founded on the nature of 
things, and been recognizable by the human con- 
science, without the promulgation of an express law, 
it would, unquestionably, have been a moral duty, 
and obligatory upon all men to the end of the world. 
Whatever general purposes however, were designed 
to be accomplished by the ordination of a weekly 
sabbath, if its observance became a duty, solely on 
account of it being commanded, so that otherwise 

G G 



226 

it would not have been known to be a part of the 
mind and will of God, the observance is plainly 
to be classed with those positive divine laws, which 
are obligatory on those persons alone to whom they 
are delivered. 

The other notion, that the law of the sabbath is 
of a mixed, or middle nature, seems also to be 
clearly chargeable with inaccuracy. That the wor- 
ship and service of the Divine Being is a moral duty 
of universal obligation, is not for a moment to be 
questioned : this duty being recognizable by the 
human conscience, as right in itself, is obligatory, 
independent of the enactments of Moses, and of 
every written code of laws whatever. It does not 
alter the nature of this, or of any other moral 
obligation however, that it requires time to per- 
form it : it requires time to visit the widow and 
the fatherless, and to relieve the destitute; but no 
one thinks of saying that these duties are of 
a mixed or middle nature, because they cannot be 
performed without the consumption of a certain 
portion of time. It seems equally incorrect, to say 
that the law of the sabbath is of a mixed or middle 
nature. The worship of the Creator is, unquestion- 
ably, a moral duty : it was a duty obligatory on men 
prior to the promulgation of the fourth command- 
ment, and it must continue to be obligatory so long 
as the relation between man and his Maker exists. 
This obligation, it is obvious, stands wholly apart 



227 

from that particular duty specified in the Mosaic 
precept, the nature of which alone, is the real point 
with which we are at present concerned. That duty 
is the assignment of a determinate time, to the exclu- 
sive service of God — the separation of the seventh day 
from a common to a sacred use ; now these things, 
the determination of the seventh day to be a day of 
rest, and the sanctification of this rest to the pecu- 
liar service and worship of Jehovah, are undeniably 
appointments purely of a positive kind. 

That the law of the sabbath is an ordinance, 
correctly speaking, of a positive nature, seems to be 
thus clear, beyond all cavil, or reasonable dispute. 
The question whether this commandment is moral 
or positive in its nature, is not at all affected, it 
is to be observed, by the obligation of the pre- 
cept, but is wholly determined by the particular 
duty it prescribes. Every positive ordinance which 
the Creator promulgates, requires an instant and 
unqualified obedience, just as certainly as if it were 
moral in its nature. It is obvious, that to obey God 
in all things he commands, whether the command be 
moral or positive, is a duty indispensably obligatory 
on men as rational creatures. But, though obedience 
to all the revealed will of God, is thus a duty of in- 
dispensable obligation, it does not follow, that every 
law which God has prescribed must necessarily be of 
a moral nature. The morality of this obedience, it is 
plain, arises not from the nature of the commandment, 



228 

but from the obligation under which man, as a rational 
being, is placed, to comply with the will of his Cre- 
ator. Every positive law, like that of the sabbath, 
requires an unhesitating obedience from all to whom 
it is delivered : to sanctify the seventh day was thus 
a duty, indispensably obligatory on all the Jewish 
people : it is wholly inconceivable, however, that a 
law of this nature can be binding on others, unless 
such an extension of its obligation be actually made 
known. 

Another argument that has been adduced in sup- 
port of the notion, that the fourth commandment is 
of a moral nature, may be considered as deserving 
of some notice, from the celebrity of the writer who 
has brought it forward. " The main objection 
against the perpetuity of this command," says Pre- 
sident Edwards, ^'^is, that the duty required is not 
moral." That this objection is an insufficient one, 
this writer attempts to prove on the following 
grounds. "That there should be certain fixed parts 
of time set apart to be devoted to rehgious exer- 
cises, is founded in the fitness of the thing, arising 
from the nature of things, and the nature and uni- 
versal state of mankind. Therefore there is as much 
reason, that there should be a command of perpetual 
and universal obligation about this, as about any 
other duty whatsoever." "The particular determi- 
nation of the proportion of time in the fourth com- 
mandment, is founded in the nature of things, only 



229 

our understandings are not sufficient absolutely to 
determine it of themselves. Without doubt, one 
proportion of time is in itself fitter than another ; 
and a certain continuance of time better than any 
other ; considering the universal state and nature of 
mankind, which God may see, though our under- 
standings are not perfect enough absolutely to de- 
termine it. So that the difference between this 
command and others, doth not lie in this, that other 
commands are founded in the fitness of the things 
themselves, arising from the universal state and na- 
ture of mankind, and this not : but, only that the 
fitness of other commands is more obvious to the 
understandings of men, and they might have seen it 
of themselves ; but this could not be precisely dis- 
covered and positively determined without the as- 
sistance of revelation. So that the command of 
God, that every seventh day should be devoted to 
religious exercises, is founded in the universal state 
and nature of mankind, as well as other commands, 
only man's reason is not sufficient without divine 
direction so exactly to determine it.'"" 

This reasoning is more specious, we apprehend, than 
relevant to the point at issue. It is, no doubt, true, 
that many of the divine laws of a positive nature, 
may have their foundation on important reasons, 
which the human mind can neither discern, nor 
comprehend. It is quite conceivable too, that things 

" Sermons on the Perpetuity of the Sabbath. Works, Vol. VII. p. 507. 



230 

which appear to men indifferent in themselves, may, 
in their nature, differ materially as understood by 
infinite wisdom. The responsibility of man, how- 
ever, does not extend beyond the measure of the 
powers and faculties with which he has been en- 
dowed : ordinances, therefore, which God may see 
to be founded in the nature of things, but which, 
from the natural and necessary limits of the human 
capacity, it is impossible the mind of man can dis- 
cern to have this foundation, can never constitute 
matter of obhgation, except they be expressly 
commanded and made known. The precise differ- 
ence between this command and others, pointed out 
by this acute writer, is, therefore, a true and suf- 
ficient reason for its being termed a positive, in 
contradistinction to a moral precept. Moral duties 
may be seen of themselves ; but this law could not 
be discovered without revelation. " Moral pre- 
cepts," says Bishop Butler, to the same purpose, 
'' are those, the reasons of which we see : positive 
precepts are those, the reasons of which we do not 
see. Moral duties arise out of the nature of the 
case itself; positive duties from external commands." 
Now, because the mind of man is insufficient to 
discern any reason for the seventh day being sanc- 
tified more than the sixth, or the eighth, or the 
ninth, the law which prescribed the sanctification of 
a particular day, is correctly called a positive pre- 
cept ; and is with manifest propriety regarded as 



231 



obligatory on those alone to whom it has been de- 
livered. 

The law of conscience cannot possibly extend 
beyond precepts, which, to the moral judgment, 
appear right in themselves, and which on this ac- 
count are recognized as of indispensable obligation 
independent of any enactment ; and precepts which 
derive their obligation from an express announce- 
ment of the divine will. " If any one asks what is 
a moral precept," says a valuable contemporary 
writer, '^ the answer must be, that the conscience, if 
honestly consulted, will determine that point. So 
far from the moral precepts of the Mosaic law being, 
to the Christian, necessary to determine what is 
right and wrong, this moral judgment is necessary to 
determine which are the moral precepts of Moses.""^ 

On this account, another argument, which has 
sometimes been confidently assigned as a sufficient 
reason for regarding the fourth commandment as a 
moral precept, namely, that the other nine are all 
undeniably of a moral nature, seems to be altogether 
futile and irrelevant. To say nothing of the fact, 
that in other scriptural passages, moral and positive 
precepts are enumerated and blended together with- 
out any distinction, Ezek. xviii. 5-9, Acts xv. 20; 
it is indubitable, that a proper and ready recognition 
of every duty of a moral nature, is an obligation 
implied in the very constitution of man, as a rational 

^ Whately on Paul's Writings. 



232 

and accountable agent, and constitutes a chief part 
of his responsibility to his Maker. 

III. — There have been some writers who, from 
being accustomed to entertain, with an undoubting 
confidence, the opinion that the sabbath was insti- 
tuted at the creation of the world, seem to have 
imagined they were warranted in drawing from the 
supposition that this was the case, the conclusion, 
'' that the ordinance was designed for the human 
race without distinction, and continues to be obli- 
gatory on all men unto the end of the world. "^ 

There has, hitherto, been much too great an 
importance attached in religious inquiries, to con- 
jectural notions of this nature. It is in vain we 
search the scriptures, with the professed view of 
ascertaining the mind and will of God, if we allow 
unsatisfactory conjectures, which admit neither of 
proof nor disproof, to influence and determine the 
conclusions we deduce from scriptural evidence. 
We can never reasonably expect to see the progress 
of religious error and delusion effectually arrested, 
and the cause of scriptural truth generally to pre- 
vail, until people are taught to abandon the absurd 
habit of interpreting the scriptures through the 
medium of preconceived theories. Men have yet, 
in a great measure, practically to learn the im- 
portant truth, that an impartial induction from 
legitimate scriptural evidence, is at the foundation of 

• Dwight. 



233 

all correct thinking upon religious subjects. It cannot 
for a nioment be questioned, that if it be ascertained 
that the scriptures contain a revelation of the divine 
will, it must be the dictate, alike of reason and of 
duty, to receive implicitly whatever they reveal. If 
the scriptures be recognized as an authoritative com- 
munication from God to man, the question is no 
longer, what do we think is probable ? but, what 
is it that we find actually revealed as true ? Instead, 
then, of forming positive opinions on points con- 
cerning which there has no distinct information been 
communicated, and allowing conjectural notions to 
influence our minds in the examination of legitimate 
evidence, it seems more consonant with reason, and 
at the same time more respectful to that authorita- 
tive character which the scriptures claim, carefully 
to distinguish between what is certain and what is 
merely possible, or presumptive; and from that portion 
of scriptural testimony, which we thus ascertain to 
be certain, to draw our conclusions, without giving 
heed to the vague notions and baseless theories of 
speculative divines. 

The particular time at which the law of the sab- 
bath was first promulgated, is obviously a question 
of fact, which, with every other point of a similar 
nature, can be determined only by competent testi- 
mony. It is, no doubtj quite conceivable, that some 
sabbatical ordinance may have been instituted at the 
Creation ; but that this actually was the case, is a 

H H 



234 

mere conjecture, which admits neither of satisfactory 
proof, nor of decisive confutation. It is certain, 
that of any institution or observance of the ordi- 
nance, prior to the time of Moses, there exists no 
record in the sacred volume. In the second chapter 
of Genesis, the sabbath is indeed mentioned, and 
the reason assigned for God sanctifying the seventh 
day, namefy, " because that in it, he had rested from 
all his work he created and made :" it is not there 
stated, however, that the observance of it commenced 
at that time. Moses, it is to be remembered, was 
not narrating the history of the work of Creation, 
for the information and obedience of Adam and the 
patriarchs, but for the instruction and use of the 
Israelites, who lived two thousand five hundred 
years afterwards. As they had received a command 
to keep a weekly day of rest, and, as one of the rea- 
sons for the ordination of this command, was to 
commemorate the completion of the work of Creation 
on the seventh day, it was natural for the sacred 
historian, when recording the work of Creation in six 
days, to mention that the seventh day was the day 
of God's resting from his works, the event which 
they had been taught to celebrate by the observance 
of a weekly day of rest. This interpretation of the 
passage seems most naturally to accord with the 
facts of the case : at all events, it is undeniable, that 
there is nothing recorded from which it can be in- 
ferred, that the law was actually promulgated to 



235 

Adam in his state of innocence ; and it is not less 
certain, that of any observance of the institution, 
prior to its promulgation by IVIoses, there exists no 
trace in the subsequent history of the antediluvian 
and patriarchal ages. 

It is deserving of notice, that while the conjecture 
that the sabbath was instituted at the Creation, is 
supported by no direct evidence contained in sacred 
history, all the subsequent evidence relative to the 
period of its first promulgation, points to a different 
conclusion. It is certain that the Jews and early 
Christians, who unquestionably possessed more fa- 
vourable opportunities of judging of the traditional 
impressions that existed respecting its origin than 
we do now, were generally opposed to the notion of 
its primeval institution. As its observance was not 
included in the reputed " seven precepts given to 
Noah," which the Jews held to be obligatory on all 
men, they adduced this fact as a conclusive proof 
that it was designed for their nation exclusively. It 
was their custom, accordingly, to designate it tlie 
bride of the synagogue ; in this way distinguishing 
it as an observance peculiar to themselves. The 
opinion that the sabbath was not known previous to 
the time of Moses, seems also to have generally ob- 
tained in the first ages of the christian church. The 
learned Heylin has argued, with much force, that as 
the early christian fathers, Justin, Irenaeus, Tertul= 
lian, all adduce the non-existence of a sabbath before 



236 

the days of Moses, as a proof that it was not de- 
signed to retain its obUgation under the gospel, the 
fact that an argument of this kind was confidently 
addressed to Jews and Jewish believers, shows very 
clearly, that this view of the subject was generally 
admitted at that time. '' If we contend that the law 
is of perpetual and universal obligation,'" says Justin, 
" we run the hazard of charging God mth inconsis- 
tency, as if he had appointed different modes of 
justification at different times : since they who lived 
before Abraham were not circumcised, and theij re ho 
lived before Moses, neither observed the sabbath, nor 
offered sacrifices, although God bore testimony to 
them that they were righteous.''^' This opinion is 
certainly in perfect accordance with the concurrent 
testimony of sacred history : for, of any observance 
of a sabbath during the patriarchal ages, no foot- 
steps are now to be traced. Neither in the history 
of the antediluvian world, nor in the history of 
Noah, nor in that of Abraham, nor of Isaac, nor of 
Jacob, is the institution once referred to. On the 
supposition that the sabbath was observed by the 
patriarchs, this circumstance is certainly not a little 
remarkable : for among the numerous minute and 
familiar narratives we possess, of the religious cus- 
toms and domestic habits of these times, it is very 
improbable that a single allusion to this weekly 
practice should never have once occurred, if it had 

■ Di, Kayc"s Justin Martyr, p. 23= 



237 

then been an established observance. As the sacred 
history advances^ this improbability becomes stronger 
and stronger. If the Israelites had been in the 
practice of observing a weekly sabbath, previous to 
their migration to Egypt, the observance must ne- 
cessarily have been, in a great measure, discontinued, 
at the period of their captivity : there is no mention 
made, however, of any difficulty they experienced 
under the rule of their oppressive bond-masters, 
in fulfilling this religious obligation ; nor of the ob- 
servance being suspended, or sinfully neglected : 
and it is certain, that those to whom the law was 
actually delivered, received no permission to dis- 
pense, at any time whatever, with the literal per- 
formance of its rigorous prescriptions. 

The sixteenth chapter of the Book of Exodus, 
contains the first account of the institution and ob- 
servance of a sabbatical ordinance, recorded in 
sacred history. It has sometimes been alleged, by 
those who suppose that the ordinance was given to 
Adam at the Creation, that the words of the fourth 
commandment, " Remember the sahhath day to keep 
it holy," plainly imply that the sabbath was known 
and observed previously. That the sabbath was 
known and observed, previous to the delivery of 
this command at Mount Sinai, is indubitable : it 
was first delivered at Sin, in the wilderness; and 
in a short time afterwards it was repeated to the 
people, '' as a kingdom of priests, a holy nation," 



238 

in that code of laws which was given them to be the 
permanent standard of their civil and religious po- 
lity. If, then, the word remember, refers to any 
previous knowledge of the institution at all, it is 
natural to think that it refers to its promulgation 
and observance in the wilderness : at all events, 
there is not the shadow of a proof, that it has any 
reference to a supposed command given to Adam, 
and observed during the patriarchal ages. It is to 
be observed further, that while there is no intimation 
in this passage in Exodus, of the sabbath being the 
revival of a former ordinance, or the continuance of 
one already established, several of the circumstances 
that are related, furnish strong indications of the 
people being previously wholly unacquainted with 
any weekly sabbatical observance. The circum- 
stances which were preliminary to the ordination of 
the law, are thus narrated : '' Then said the Lord 
unto Moses, Behold I will rain bread from heaven 
for you, and the people shall go out and gather a 
certain rate every day, that I may prove them, 
whether they will walk in my law or no. And it 
shall come to pass, that on the sixth day, they shall 
prepare that which they bring in, and it shall be 
twice as much as they gather daily." This was 
spoken to Moses, on account of the murmuring of 
the people for the want of bread. It is further re- 
lated, that when the manna was given, the people 
*^^ gathered it every morning, evbry man according to 



239 

his eating : and when the sun waxed hot it melted." 
It is stated also, that notwithstanding they had been 
strictly enjoined not to leave any portion of what 
they gathered until the following morning, " some 
of them did leave of what they had gathered, and it 
bred worms and stank, and Moses was wroth with 
them.'' It had already been intimated to Moses, 
that a double portion was to be gathered on the sixth 
day, but it does not appear that the reason of this 
double gathering was, at that time, assigned to 
the people. Now it is natural to think, that if they 
had been accustomed to keep the seventh day as a 
sabbath, this circumstance of a double supply being 
furnished on the sixth day, would have excited little 
or no surprise : we find it recorded, however, that 
when, " on the sixth day the people gathered twice 
as much bread," " all the rulers of the congregation 
came and told Moses ;" evidently apprehensive of 
some mistake, and fearing, probably, that serious 
consequences might ensue if this were a second 
violation of the established regulation. To this ap- 
plication of the rulers, Moses made the following 
reply, now assigning as the reason for this double 
portion being gathered on the sixth day, the ordina- 
tion of a day of holy rest on the next. " This is 
that which the Lord hath said. To-morrow is the 
rest of the holy sabbath unto the Lord : bake that 
which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will 
seethe : and that which remaineth over, lay up for 



240 

you to be kept until the morning." '' And they 
laid it up until the morning, as Moses bade, and it 
did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. 
And Moses said. Eat that to-day : for to-day is a 
sabbath unto the Lord, to-day ye shall not find it in 
the field : Six days ye shall gather it, but the se- 
venth day which is the sabbath, in it there shall 
be none." 

The whole tenor of this narrative seems, naturally, 
to accord with the supposition, that this was the 
first actual institution of a weekly day of rest. The 
words of Moses would intimate more distinctly than 
they even do at present, that it was the institution 
of a new observance, if the English version had been 
more literally rendered : for, in the original, it is the 
indefinite article which occurs in the 23rd and 26th 
verses. The reply of Moses to the application of 
the rulers, ought accordingly to have been rendered, 
" To-morrow is a rest of a holy sabbath unto the 
Lord." ^^ Six days shall ye gather it, but on the 
seventh day which is a sabbath, in it there shall 
be none." 

That the observance of a weekly day of rest was a 
new institution at that time, seems also to be plainly 
indicated by the conduct of the people, on receiving 
these instructions respecting the seventh day : at 
first, it appears, several of them refused to comply 
with the prescribed regulation. ^^And it came to 
pass, that there went out some of the people on the 



241 

seventh day for to gather, and they found none." 
This conduct called forth the following divine ex- 
postulation, in which there seems to be clearly 
implied the fact, that the sabbath was one of the 
commandments ^' given' to the people "to prove 
them whether they would walk in God's law or no :" 
'^ And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse 
ye to keep my commandments and my laws 9 See, 
for that the Lord hath giveii you the sahbath, there- 
fore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of 
two days : abide ye every man in his place, let no 
man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the 
people rested on the seventh day"^- 

That the sabbath zvas given to the Israelites at 
this time, seems also to be plainly indicated in pas- 
sages which occur in books of a later date. " Where- 
fore I caused them to go forth out of the land of 
Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness, and I 
gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judg- 
ments, which if a man do he shall even live in them. 
Moreover also / gave them my sabbaths to be a sign 
between me and them, that they might know I am 
the Lord that sanctify them."^ " And madest known 
unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them 
precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses 
thy servant."' These passages seem to be strongly 
at variance with the supposition that the sabbath 
was known and observed as a divine ordinance 

s Exod. XV. 30. h Ezek. xx. 10-12. iNeh. ix. 14. 

I I 



242 

during the patriarchal ages : for if this had been the 
case, it is difficult to see in what sense it could have 
been given and made known in the wilderness at the 
time of Moses. 

That the sabbath was limited to the Jewish peo- 
ple, and was not designed for the observance of 
mankind at large, is clearly shown also by the na- 
ture of several of the reasons assigned for its insti- 
tution. It is declared to have been an essential part 
of their national covenant, and a sign distinguishing 
them from every other nation. " Wherefore the 
children of Israel shall keep the sabbath to observe 
the sabbath throughout their generations, for a per- 
petual covenant ; it is a sign between me and the 
children of Israel for ever."^ That the institution 
was designed for the Israelites alone, is shown also 
by the reasons by which its observance w^as enforced. 
In the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy, the Sinaitic 
covenant is repeated, and the miraculous deliverance 
of the people from Egyptian captivity, assigned as 
the sole cause of the sabbath being instituted. "And 
remember that thou wast a servant in the land of 
Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee 
out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretch- 
ed out arm : therefore the Lord thy God com- 
manded thee to keep the sabbath day."^ There are 
other passages, indeed, in which the sabbath is 
stated to have been instituted in commemoration of 

'■ Exod. xxxi. 16, 17. See also Ezek. xx. 12. ' Deut. v. 15. 



243 

God's rest from the work of creation ; but it is to be 
observed, that even in these cases, the ordinance is 
spoken of as '^ a sign" of the covenant into which 
the nation had entered. The sabbath '' is a sign 
between me and the children of Israel for ever : for 
in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on 
the seventh day he rested and refreshed.'"" 

It is thus very manifest, that the notion of the 
sabbath having been instituted at the Creation, 
from which the conclusion has so hastily been 
drawn, that " it is binding on all men in every age 
of the world," has prevailed without any sufficient 
proof. It is certain that there exists no express 
precept or undoubted example, from the existence 
of which alone, we could w^arrantably infer, that it 
was observed anterior to the time of Moses : on the 
other hand, it is the express testimony of the in- 
spired writers, that it " was given to the Israelites" 
by Moses, — that it '' was made known" to that 
people in the wilderness, — and that it was afterwards 
promulgated to them as " a kingdom of priests, a 
holy nation," at Mount Sinai. That the ordinance 
was designed for this kingdom of priests alone, 
seems also to be clearly indicated by several of the 
purposes it was instituted to serve : it was to be 
" a perpetual covenant between them and Jehovah," 
and *^ a sign between him and them for ever," thus 
distinguishing them from every other people. As 

"' Exod. xxxi. 17. 



244 

the sabbath thus formed an essential part of the 
Sinaitic covenant, and as its observance was enforced 
by sanctions pecuhar to the IsraeUtish theocratic 
government, it is natural to conclude that it was 
designed for the Jewish people exclusively, and was 
destined to terminate with that system of civil and 
religious polity with which it was, in divine wisdom, 
incorporated. 

IV. — By some writers, it has been maintained, 
that though the observance of a sabbath is not ex- 
pressly mentioned previous to its promulgation to 
the Israelites in the wilderness, there are indications 
of a septenary division of time in the Mosaic history 
of the patriarchal ages, which can receive no satis- 
factory solution, except on the supposition of the 
sabbath having been familiarly known at that early 
period. It is usual with this class of writers also 
to advance, that there are indications of a general 
knowledge of the weekly sabbath to be found in the 
sacredness attached by the Gentiles to the number 
seven ; and it has been inferred, that this traditional 
knowledge, of which (it is assumed) several of the 
heathen nations were in possession, must have been 
transmitted to them from the earliest ages of the 
world. 

On these, and on some other collateral questions, 
of a nature similarly obscure and conjectural, there 
has long existed, among learned writers, a consider- 
able diversity of opinion. When, indeed, the nature 



245 

of the evidence relative to them is considered, it is 
unreasonable to expect that the most dispassionate 
inquirers will ever, on such points, be found en- 
tirely to agree. On the particular consideration of 
such conjectural questions, we do not feel called 
upon at the present to enter ; for whether or not 
there be any sufficient reason for entertaining the 
opinion, that some sabbatical institution was ob- 
served previous to the time of Moses, (and, as has 
already been remarked, it is certainly quite possible 
that some law of the kind may have been then in 
force, although no instance of its observance has 
been recorded,) it is manifest that the question of 
the existing obligation of the weekly sabbath, as 
well as the grounds and extent of religious obliga- 
tion in general, are wholly independent of all points 
of this doubtful nature. It is the certain testimony 
of the apostles of Christ, it is ever to be remem- 
bered, which constitutes the authoritative rule of 
christian duty, and not the dubious theories which 
learned writers have applied to the interpretation of 
the scanty records of ancient sacred and profane 
history. 

Nearly all the passages which, at one time, it was 
customary for the advocates of the perpetuity of the 
sabbath to adduce, in support of the conjecture, that 
the Pagan nations were in possession of a traditional 
knowledge of a weekly day of rest, are now gene- 
rally allowed to be either wholly irrelevant, or so 



246 

very ambiguoua in their meaning, as to admit of no 
satisfactory inference being deduced from them. 
The few passages which are acknowledged as genu- 
ine/ serve chiefly to prove, that the custom of 
attaching a peculiar sacredness to the number seven, 
obtained very generally among several of the Pagan 
nations, — a custom, the existence of which no one 
has ever sought to call in question. The peculiar 
importance that was attached to this number, by so 
many ancient writers, both sacred and profane, is 
doubtless a very singular coincidence ; and affords 
a considerable degree of countenance to the conjec- 
ture, that the practice may have originated in one 
and the same source. Even this, however, can 
ne^ er be correctly considered as being more than a 
plausible conjecture, for it admits of no satisfac- 
tory proo£ 

In the sacred writings, it is well known, the num- 
ber seven is very frequently used to denote perfection. 
It is possible that this use of the word may have 
bee:: derived from a knowledge, transmitted from 

"° Sevcsal d tibe Bqi^ wMcli it was oistiomarY for all the old puritan divines 
In giwe as the amfliwfflriitles (of Hesioi and Homer upon this point, are now nn- 
deistiood to laave heea flie coiiaage of some ancient writer, (supposed to have 
ArisitofcuEiIiiBS, m: CfeHBeriit ©f Alexandria,) who had thought proper to invent 
to ^aT?e nMs or soiiae aimEaT purpose. Those who have lately been at the 
of fiiaiwiiiiffag die woiks of diese poets, purposely m. qra^t of snch cita- 
tKKQS, have heoa maaMe to discover, any trace of them. The puritan divines 
lad evademSJy all copied &em one from another ; and, in doing this, they have 
been Mlowed by nmsiooms ne^pedable writers, since their time. — See, on this 
smifett, A Lmeir U G. Wmsim. Esq,, hy T. S. Hughes, B.A., of Cambridge. 



247 

one Qfeneration to another, that the work of creation 
was completed and made perfect on the seventh day : 
or, perhaps, in some traditional knowledge which 
the patriarchs possessed, of God resting from his 
works on that day. It is not impossible also, but 
that a corruption of this tradition may have been 
the original source of the ancient superstition pre- 
valent in pagan countries, respecting the number 
seven : this supposition, however, possesses, we ap- 
prehend, a very faint shadow of probability. Some 
learned writers have maintained, with a much better 
show of reason, that the origin of this custom is to 
be traced to the practice of keeping the seventh 
month sacred in honour of the birth of Apollo : and 
others with a greater appearance of probability still, 
have contended that the true origin of the custom, 
is to be found in the number of the planets then 
known to exist, from which source, it is well 
known, the heathens derived the names they gave 
to the days of the week. " Dion Cassius, in 
Pompeius, c. 6, says, that the Romans derived the 
practice of assigning the names of the planets to 
different days, from the Egyptians, and that it had 
become, in a certain degree, national among them. 
Whether the Egyptians, having received the com- 
putation of time by weeks from the Jews, ap- 
plied the names of the seven heavenly bodies then 
known to be immediately connected with our sys- 
tem to the days of the week, or whether their 



248 

observation of the heavenly bodies first led them to 
compute time by periods of seven days, may be 
doubtful ; but it appears certain that the computa- 
tion was made subservient to the purposes of as- 
trology. "° The whole of this curious subject seems 
to be irretrievably involved in doubt and obscurity. 
Whether Homer possessed any knowledge of a 
septenary division of time at all, is now admitted 
to be by no means certain : it is abundantly clear, 
indeed, that as early as his time, a pecibliar sacred- 
ness was attached to the number seven ; whatever 
may have been the source in which the superstition 
originated. As it respects our present purpose 
however, it is of more importance to notice, that 
though there is sufficient evidence of the prevalence 
of this custom among the Greeks and other nations, 
there exists no proof whatever of any of these na- 
tions having ever kept a weekly sabbath. On the 
contrary, it is certain that the Gentiles were, for a 
long period, entirely ignorant of the existence of 
such an observance ; and it is matter of history, 
that when they first heard of it, they derided it as a 
Jewish superstition. 

It is to be remembered, moreover, that it is the 
explicit testimony of the sacred historian, that the 
sabbath was given to the Israelites as a nation 
separated to God's peculiar and exclusive service ; — 
that it was to be " a perpetual covenant and sign 

° Dr. Kaye's Justin Martyr, p. 95. 



249 

between God and the children of Israel for ever."^ 
" Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep : for it is a sign 
between me throughout your generations : that ye 
may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify 
you^"^ When the unequivocal import of this and 
similar statements^ assigned by Jehovah himself as 
the reason for the ordination of the sabbath, is con- 
sidered, it appears very strange that, in the face of 
such an authority, so many of the professed advo- 
cates of the claims of revealed religion, should have 
shown so great an anxiety to discover evidences of 
the existence of a sabbath among Pagan nations. It 
is incontrovertible that the scriptures state that the 
sabbath was given to the Jewish people as a sign of 
their national covenant, serving, with other ordi- 
nances, to distinguish them from all the nations by 
which they were surrounded : if then, these writers 
had discovered the evidence, in support of the notion 
that the institution was designed for mankind in ge- 
neral and was observed in every age of the world, of 
which they were in quest, it is not easy to see in 
what sense the institution could, in that case, have 
been correctly said to be " a sign between God and 
the children of Israel for ever," or how it could have 
served the end at all, of perpetuating among the 
Israelites a knowledge of the important fact, that 
Jehovah had sanctified or separated them from 
every other people. 

•^ Exod. xxxi. 16. i Exod. xxxi. 13. 

K K 



250 

There seems to be equally little reason for at- 
taching the importance that some have done, to the 
early adoption of the custom of computing time by 
the number seven. If, indeed, the computation of 
time by periods of seven days, had been the only or 
principal use of the number which obtained during 
the patriarchal ages, there might be some colour of 
reason for attaching a degree of importance to the 
practice : this, however, was by no means the case. 
The word week was used among the Hebrews, 
not merely as denoting a period of seven days ; 
it signified also, a period of seven years, computing 
from one sabbatical year to another, and also a 
period of seven times seven years, reckoned from 
one sabbatical jubilee to another. This exten- 
sive use of the word seems to have obtained, in 
some degree, among the Israelites, not only subse- 
quent to the erection of their theocratic government, 
but even during the patriarchal ages, prior to the 
ordination of any sabbatical year or jubilee. We 
read in the Book of Genesis, for instance, that 
Laban, in reply to Jacob's expostulation, (on the 
occasion of his not receiving Rachel to wife, having 
served for her, as was stipulated, seven years,) used 
the following language. " It must not be so done 
in our country, to give the younger before the first 
born. Fulfil her week, and w-e will give thee this 
also for the service which thou shalt serve with me, 
yet seven other years.'' " And Jacob did so, and 



251 

fulfilled her week, and he gave him Rachel his 
daughter to wife also." It is by no one pretended 
that the seventh year sabbath w^as instituted ante- 
rior to the time of Moses : if, however, the practice 
of computing time by periods of seven days, (and it 
ought to be borne in mind, that the prevalence of 
this practice at that time at all, is by no means cer- 
tain,) is to be regarded as an evidence of the early 
institution of a weekly sabbath, and of its having 
been originally designed for mankind in general ; 
the practice of computing time by weeks of years, 
may with equal cogency be adduced in proof of the 
ordination of a sabbatical year, previous to the erec- 
tion of the Jewish theocracy. 

That at the introduction of the gospel, all the 
christian converts should have adopted the practice 
of computing time by periods of seven days, was 
what was naturally to have been expected. Jesus 
and his first disciples being all Jews, were already 
accustomed to use this hebdomadal division of time, 
and the Gentile converts would naturally be led to 
adopt the same convenient custom. The language 
in which some of the leading facts of the gospel are 
narrated, such as that Christ rose from the dead 
'' on the first day of the week,'' would of itself indeed 
teach the primitive believers to adopt the practice ; 
and it is not improbable, that the occurrence of the 
above and other similar expressions, led also to the 
general adoption of the custom of holding their 



252 

stated convocations for worship on the first day of 
the week, a practice which, it is evident, obtained at 
a very early period of the christian church. 

V. — It has been customary with some writers to 
assume, that the duty required in the fourth com- 
mandment is, simply, the sanctification of a seventh 
portion of time, or of one day in seven : and that 
the precept is obeyed by sanctifying the first day of 
the week, just as well as by sanctifying the seventh 
day, or any other. By this representation of the 
requirements of the law, these persons have attempted 
to escape from that charge of inconsistency, which 
so palpably attaches to those who deduce from a 
commandment which states, that " the seventh day 
is the sabbath," the conclusion that men are now 
under an obligation to sanctify another day, of which 
the precept makes no mention. 

This method of interpreting a positive law of 
heaven, if less glaringly inconsistent than the il- 
logical practice it attempts to avoid, seems in itself 
to be not less unjustifiable. We never read in 
any part of the Old or New Testament scriptures, 
of any law requiring men to keep holy a seventh 
portion of time, or one day in seven : the sanc- 
tification of the sabbath, and of the seventh day, 
are the only duties mentioned ; and these two are 
uniformly represented to be the same thing, — the 
expressions being familiarly used as convertible terms. 
It will not be questioned, that the weekly sabbath 



253 

observed by the Jewish people, was that prescribed 
in the fourth commandment : there were not two 
or more weekly sabbaths prescribed to them ; there 
was only one — and that one was expressly stated to 
be the seventh day. As then, the sanctification of 
this day was the duty particularized in the command- 
ment, it is manifestly a gross and most presumptuous 
misrepresentation of the precept, to say that it 
requires merely the sanctification of one day in seven, 
a prescription, mentioned neither in the decalogue 
nor in any other portion of the Sacred volume. 

No doubt, if God had enjoined the sanctification of 
a seventh portion of time, without specifying any 
particular day, men would have been at liberty to 
observe any day they pleased. To recognize, how- 
ever, the obhgation of the fourth commandment, 
and arbitrarily to alter its prescriptions at our own 
pleasure ; to affirm that it is immaterial what day 
be observed, provided we do observe a sabbath, 
when a particular day has been distinctly specified ; 
to deal in this manner with the express command- 
ments of Jehovah, must surely be alike presumptuous 
and unwarrantable. All conduct of this kind stands 
exposed to the threatenings annexed to every inter- 
ference with the positive laws of heaven. If this 
sabbatical law extends to christians, it behoves them 
to give it an unhesitating and exact obedience. It 
is not for a moment to be questioned that He who 
delivered the law, possesses alone a right to alter its 



254 

prescriptions. We may indeed imagine that one day 
is as good as another, and that the observance of the 
first day of the week must serve precisely the same 
ends as the observance of the seventh. Thus 
thought Naaman the Syrian, that one river must be 
as good as another. This may be all quite true, so 
long as God makes no difference between one day, 
or one river, and another : — when that difference, 
however, is once made, and intimated for man's 
obedience, by the promulgation of a positive law, it 
behoves christians to beware of contemning God, by 
gainsaying what he has said. In matters of this 
kind, men have nothing to do, but to hearken with 
implicit deference to the voice of their Maker, — to 
listen, and to obey. 

VI. — Some advocates of the modern sabbath have 
attempted to introduce a modification of the pre- 
scribed mode of observing the original law, and have 
contended that it was only with this proposed mo- 
dification of its duties, the precept is now binding. 
They conceive that an allowance ought to be made 
for the difference between the rigour of the Jewish 
and the liberality of the Christian dispensation ; and 
that a correspondent alteration ought to be made in 
the interpretation of the sabbatical observance. The 
Jewish people, they think, were unnecessarily scru- 
pulous in their manner of keeping the day, and 
committed the gross mistake of making the literal 
observance of its prescriptions the end itself of the 



255 

institution^ instead of viewing it in the correct light 
(correct, that is, according to the light in which 
these modern Sabbatarians view it,) of being merely 
'' an important means of religious improvement." 
While, therefore, they disapprove entirely of trans- 
ferring the rigour and austerity of the Jewish 
observance to the mild dispensation of the gospel, 
they contend that though a literal adherence to its 
prescriptions is no longer called for, the object which 
the observance is adapted to promote, is so highly 
important, that the recognition and prudent ob- 
servance of the law is still an important religious 
duty. This seems to be the chief ground on which 
Bishop Horsley wished to rest his defence of the 
modern doctrine. " The spirit of the Jewish law," 
says this writer, '' was rigour and severity. Rigour 
and severity were adapted to the rude manners of 
the first ages of mankind, and were particularly 
suited to the refractory temper of the Jewish people. 
The rigour of the law itself was far outdone by the 
rigour of the popular superstition and the phari- 
saical hypocrisy — if, indeed, superstition and hy- 
pocrisy, rather than a particular ill will against our 
Lord, were the motives with the people and their 
rulers, to tax him with a breach of the sabbath, 
when they saw his power exerted on the sabbath 
day for the relief of the afflicted. The christian 
law is the law of liberty. We are not, therefore, to 
take the measure of our obedience from the letter 



256 

of the Jewish law,— much less from Jewish preju- 
dices, and the suggestions of Jewish malignity. In 
the sanctification of the sahbath in particular, we 
have our Lord's express authority to take a pious 
discretion for our guide ; keeping constantly in view 
the end of the institution, and its necessary subor- 
dination to higher duties. "'^ 

This view of the subject is no doubt very specious ; 
and wearing as it does to most minds, the appear- 
ance of steering a middle course — a course dictated 
by prudent moderation, and removed at an equal 
distance from the error of those who insist on the 
sabbath being still kept with Pharisaical austerity, 
and the apparently not less dangerous notion of es- 
teeming every day alike holy, it naturally recom- 
mends itself at once, to all men of timid minds, who 
are satisfied with a hasty and superficial view of the 
question.^ Plausible, however, as this notion at 
first sight appears, it is liable to the serious objection 
of being destitute of all legitimate scriptural evi- 
dence : — it seems to be founded indeed on a radically 
defective and erroneous conception of the original 

"■ Sermon on Mark ii. 27. 

° On this and on every other question of apparent difficulty, upon which 
there exists a diversity of opinion, men of w^eak and undecided minds, readily 
fall in vfith any notion that appears in their view to modify the subject. This 
modification of the question is looked upon as the safest course ; and usually 
saves them the exertion of personally instituting such an accurate inquiry into 
its real bearing, as would qualify them to come to a decisive and satisfactory 
conclusion upon it. 



257 

design of the sabbatical institution, as well as of the 
pecuhar nature of that economy with which it was 
interwoven : — and it assumes, moreover, a discretion- 
ary power to adapt the duties of the positive laws of 
Jehovah to our own notions of propriety, which is 
alike unauthorized and presumptuous. 

Whatever '' pious discretion" men may now as- 
sume in their manner of keeping the sabbath, it is 
certain, that the law itself gives no person, whether 
Jew or Christian, a discretionary power to dispense 
with any one of its prescriptions. That the Jewish 
people did not consider themselves at liberty to mo- 
dify, in any degree, these prescriptions, is unequivo- 
cally shown by their uniform careful observance of 
them :* and it is not less certain, that in strictly ad- 
hering to the letter of the law, they were simply 
acting conformably with their revealed rule of duty. 
The notion that they usually overlaid the observance 
with unnecessary restrictions, and magnified the im- 
portance of an outward compliance with its duties, 
at the expense of that diffusion of religious know- 
ledge the institution was calculated to promote, is 
unsupported, we apprehend, by any legitimate proof. 

* At the conquest of Jerusalem, by Pompey, (B. C. 63,) the siege would have 
been protracted to a much greater length, had the Jews been willing to make 
the least eflfort in their own defence on the sabbath ; but as they scrupulously 
abstained from all labour on that day, the Romans, every sabbath, filled up the 
ditch, and set their engines against the walls without opposition : this enabled 
them, on other days of the week, to make their attacks with more effect, and 
contributed greatly to their ultimate success. 

L L 



258 

That this or any other of the institutions of the old 
covenant^ indeed, was designed principally to spread 
religious and general knowledge among the people, 
appears to be an assumption founded on an entire 
misconception of the nature and primary design of 
the Mosaic economy. It is not to be forgotten, that 
there was a veil placed purposely upon the face of 
Moses, hindering the people from seeing to the end 
of that, which was afterwards to be abolished ; — a 
veil which was never once removed until the advent 
of the Messiah. The old covenant, moreover, was 
designed to beget a spirit of fear and bondage, 
and to retain its subjects in a state of pupilage, 
until their arrival at that promise of spiritual re- 
demption they inherited. The rigorous prescrip- 
tions of the sabbath, in conjunction with the other 
laws which they were compelled to obey, w^ere, for 
wise purposes, imposed on them, until the time of 
gospel reformation ; when, to those whose hearts 
were opened to understand the good news of salva- 
tion, this burden was displaced by the service of 
Him, whose " yoke is easy and whose burden is 
light." Feeling, however, as the Jewish people 
sensibly did, the service of Moses to be '' a yoke 
which neither thev nor their fathers were able to 
bear," they never presumed to introduce any mo- 
dified interpretation of the positive precepts of 
Jehovah. As respected the manner in which they 
kept the sabbath day in particular, it is certain that 



259 

they, at least, were not left to their own '^ pious 
discretion/' for the literal observance of the pre- 
scriptions of the law, which related, it is to be re- 
membered, not only to an abstinence from all bodily 
and secular labour, but to the regular domestic 
economy of every family, was enforced by the most 
solemn of all earthly sanctions. The law was, 
" Whosoever doth any work on the sabbath, (and 
the kindling of a fire w^as specified as doing work,) 
shall surely be put to death." Thus were they 
commanded literally " to rest upon the sabbath 
day." 

It is not to be questioned, then, that in scrupu- 
lously adhering to all the prescriptions of the sab- 
bath, the Jewish people w^ere merely acting in 
conformity with the injunctions delivered to them. 
That they generally overlaid it with needless re- 
strictions, or super stitiously made the observance 
itself an end, in this way misconceiving its design as 
an important means of diffusing knowledge, seem to 
be pure figments of modern invention, deriving no 
countenance either from the facts of sacred history, 
or from the scriptural account of the original design 
of the sabbatical institution. 

It has been supposed, indeed, that the conduct of 
Jesus, on various occasions, with respect to the sab- 
bath, in taking liberties with it, which at that tim.e 
were deemed unjustifiable, was meant to be a re- 
proof of the over-scrupulous sanctity of the Phari- 



260 

sees, in their manner of observing the day ; and in 
support of the supposition, this text has confidently 
been cited, " The sabbath was made for man, and 
not man for the sabbath," — words which have been 
interpreted as " an emphatic axiom, expressive of 
the universal design and utihty of the institution." 
The conduct of Jesus referred to, has also been fre- 
quently represented as being a practical correction 
of the unnecessary strictness with which the sabbath 
was then observed, with a view of permanently 
adapting the observance to the mild spirit of that 
new dispensation he was about to introduce. This 
interpretation of Christ's conduct, is usually assumed 
to be so obviously correct, as to admit of no dispute : 
specious, however, as it no doubt may be made to 
appear, it has been adopted, we apprehend, on very 
insufficient grounds. 

It is perfectly true, that, in various instances, the 
scribes and Pharisees added traditions of their own 
to the prescriptions of Moses, numerous and bur- 
densome as these prescriptions of themselves were : 
while Jesus, however, frequently rebuked these men 
for their selfish, hypocritical pretences, and their 
sanctimonious, self-righteous notions, it does not ap- 
pear he ever found fault with the Jewish people for 
strictly complying with the rigorous terms of the 
sabbatical law, or with those of any other of the laws 
of Moses. On the contrary, it is certain, that he 
uniformly recognized the authority and literal obli- 



261 

gation of all the Mosaic precepts ;" and, by personally 
fulfilling all righteousness, paid them the highest 
conceivable honour and respect. 

It is deserving of peculiar notice, that in most of 
the instances in which Jesus has been supposed to 
reprove the Pharisees for overloading the sabbath 
with needless restrictions, his principal and real pur- 
pose appears to have been to assert, by an intentional 
violation of the law, his divine authority, and liis 
own right as the Messiah, to dispense with all the 
positive enactments of Moses. It was evidently with 
this view, for instance, that he asserted his lordship 
or power over the sabbath, " The Son of man" (the 
usual title he applied to himself) '^is Lord also of 
the sabbath." It seems to have been the leading 
purpose of the conduct and conversation of Jesus, 
during his ministry, not so much to communicate 
christian instruction to the Jewish people, or even to 
his own disciples, (who indeed, as he himself informed 
them, were not then competent to receive it,) as to 
furnish satisfactory evidence of the validity of his 
claim to the Messiahship, while, at the same time, he 
was finishing the work given him to do. As the 
salvation of men had uniformly been represented 
in the Old Testament scriptures, as depending 
on the future revelation that was to be made, re- 



" " Jesus said to the multitude and to his disciples, The scribes and the Phari- 
sees sit in Hoses' seat : all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that 
observe and do." — Matt, xxiii. 2. 3. 



262 

specting the person and work of the Messiah^ the 
chief questions which Jesus seems to have aimed at 
calling men's attention to, were such as these, 
" What think ye of Christ ?" " Whose son is he ?" 
By what works was he to prove his character and 
mission ? 

In the fifth chapter of the Gospel of John, for 
instance, we find it narrated, that Jesus wrought a 
supernatural cure on a lame man who lay at the 
pool of Bethesda ; and that on this cure being ef- 
fected, he commanded the man to take up his bed 
and walk. This took place on the sabbath day. 
The Jews finding the man carrying his bed, charged 
him with breaking the sabbath, and doubtless on 
good grounds, for this act was a manifest violation 
of the law of Moses. The man, on being challenged 
for his conduct, naturally stated what had taken 
place, and afterwards gave his accusers Jesus as 
his authority, for what he had done : the charge of 
breaking the sabbath was accordingly transferred to 
Jesus himself.^ What then was Christ's conduct, on 
being charged with violating the sabbath ? Did he 
attempt to disprove the charge, by showing that the 
Jew^s had misinterpreted and overstated the law 
upon the subject? No; he appealed at once, it 
is deserving of notice, to the divine authority he 

* The act was evidently regarded as a capital crime ; for it is related, " there- 
fore they sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath 
day.'" — John v. 16. 



263 

possessed^ as furnishing his warrant for breaking 
the sabbath, and superseding every positive precept 
of Moses. Jesus answered them, '^ My Father 
worketh hitherto and I work."^ 

It w^as on the same grounds, namely, his own es- 
pecial authority, that he rested his defence, when his 
disciples were charged wdth rubbing out the grains 
of corn on the sabbath. He seems to admit the act 
itself was unlawful ; but, after making an allusion to 
the case of David and his companions, in eating the 
shew bread in the temple, (in referring to which, it 
appears to have been his object to show that the au- 
thority he possessed was at least equal to that of high 
priest, who dispensed with the divine law on that oc- 

^ This answer was evidently understood by the Jews as implying the posses- 
sion of divine power, and as calling God his Father in such a peculiar sense, as 
to claim an equality with God : for it is related, it exasperated them to that 
extent, " that they sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken 
the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with 
God." This obviously was the leading question to which Jesus wished to di- 
rect their attention ; and it afforded him an opportunity of proving, which he 
immediately afterwards did, the validity of his claim to the Messiahship. — See 
John v. 17-47. 

In this and similar passages, we may be allowed to remark, there seems to be 
contained the simplest and best key to a satisfactory solution of the controverted 
question respecting the person of Christ. At that period, it is obvious, there 
was no difference of opinion about the meaning of the expression, " the Son of 
God:" that this designation implied a real and proper divinity of nature, was 
on all sides agreed. The question between Jesus and his opponents was, at no 
time, whether this appellation signified a divine person ; the real question at 
issue was, whether his claim to be the Son of God was a valid one. This, then, 
is the proper ground on which the question ought to be placed. It is a plain 
matter nf fact, which every plain-minded reader of the gospel history can judge 
of as correctly and as satisfactorily as can the most erudite critic. The question 



264 

casion,) he declares that ^' the Son of man is Lord of 
the sabbath, inasmuch as the sabbath was made for 
man and not man for the sabbath." It is in this 
connexion that the latter expression ought to be in- 
terpreted : it does not stand alone, but is brought 
forward as a proposition, from which the conclusion 
is drawn, that Jesus possessed an entire dominion 
over this and every other positive appointment of 
the Mosaic economy. It seems then to be wholly 
incorrect, to interpret this expression as designed to 
affirm " the universal design and utility of the sab- 
batical institution." The meaning of the words, 
when viewed in their connexion, is plainly this, " The 
sabbath was made for man, and not man for the 



is not, what meaning do learned theologians now attach to the name given to 
Jesus, " the Son of God ?" but, what was the universal sense in which this 
designation was understood, when Jesus was on earth ? That in calling himself 
the Son of God, Jesus was understood by his enemies to mean he was a divine 
person, is indubitable ; for it was on this very account they charged him with 
blasphemy; *' he said God was his Father, making himself equal with God." 
That, by the expression, he actually wished to convey this meaning, ie not less 
certain ; for when this charge of blasphemy was made against him, he did not, it 
is to be observed, attempt to refute it, by showing they had misinterpreted 
what he intended to state : on the contrary, he tacitly admitted this was the 
true sense of his words, and proceeded to ground his defence on that divine evi- 
dence by which he substantiated his claims as the Messiah. The solemn con- 
troversy between Jesus and his opponents, on this point, was never settled 
during his life ; and terminated in the apparent victory of the latter, in their 
cruel crucifixion of the Son of God. Then it was, that their mistaken judg- 
ment and unjust sentence were refuted and reversed ; and that (by the Father 
interposing and raising Jesus from the dead, thus " declaring him to be the Son 
of God with power,") the controversy was finally, and beyond all rational 
doubt, determined. 



265 

sabbath, therefore the Son of man is Lord also of 
the sabbath/' All the positive appointments of the 
Mosaic covenant, that had been instituted in adap- 
tation to that stage of the progress of the scheme of 
redemption, could be abrogated by the same au- 
thority which originally enacted them. The sab- 
bath was one of these ordinances ; and the Son of 
man claimed a dominion over it, in virtue of the 
divine authority he possessed, — a power to dispense 
with its obligation, and to supersede it by the insti- 
tutions of his own kingdom.' 

While Jesus, however, in this manner publicly 
and avowedly violated the sabbath, and gave as 
his reason for doing so, that the sabbath zvas made 
not for himself hut for man, he never once, during 
his public ministry, gave any general permission to 
dispense with the prescriptions of this or any other 
law of Moses ; much less did he teach men to use a 
'^ pious discretion," in modifying the positive laws of 
heaven to suit their own notions of propriety. It is 
manifest, therefore, that to adduce his conduct in 
asserting his personal dominion over every positive 
precept of the Mosaic covenant, as an authoritative 
precedent for men now assuming a discretionary li- 
berty with the positive laws of Jehovah, is altogether 
erroneous and unjustifiable. In matters of this 



[n confirmation of this view of the words, see the parallel passages. 

Matt. xii. 1-8. Luke vi. 1-5. 

M M 



266 

kind, it is inconceivable that any compromise, or 
modification of duty whatever, can be warrantable. 
To assume, indeed, a liberty to modify any positive 
divine precept, is to introduce a principle fraught 
with the most serious evils and dangers : for the 
same principle which would warrant us in altering, 
in any degree, the prescribed mode of observing the 
sabbath, or any similar institution, would necessarily 
open a door for the admission of the countless tra- 
ditions and inventions of " the mystery of iniquity." 
It is no doubt true, that we offend God as cer- 
tainly, by neglecting to obey the positive laws he 
has promulgated, as by adding our own inventions 
and will-worship to the revealed will of heaven : 
there is plainly a possibility of erring in either way. 
When, however, after the obligation of a positive law 
like that of the sabbath is recognized, we presume to 
modify its duties in accommodation to our own notions 
of '' pious discretion," the sin and danger of our 
conduct is inevitable. It is impossible that conduct 
of this kind can either be acceptable to God, or safe 
for man. An unhesitating comphance with the re- 
vealed will of God, (as one of the best of the Puritan 
divines^ has somewhere said,) walking humbly and 
steadfastly according to this rule, a supreme regard 
to the authority of Christ as the only Lord of the 

" Dr. John Owen. 



267 

conscience ; it is acting thus, that can alone prove 
permanently satisfactory to our own minds, justify 
us in the eyes of all sober-thinking christian men, 
and produce an obedience acceptable to Him whom 
alone christians are bound to serve. 

VII. — By a few writers it has been supposed, that 
the change of the sabbath from the seventh to the 
first day of the week, is intimated in the ninth verse 
of the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
" There remaineth therefore a rest (a sabbatism) to 
the people of God." In support of this opinion it has 
been advanced, that as in this passage, the apostle, 
instead of the word Katapausis, which he had pre- 
viously been using, to express that rest of which 
he is treating, uses the Hebrew term Sabbatismos, 
which admits of the signification, " the keeping of 
a sabbath," it is warrantable to infer, that this 
change of the term was made in order to include 
the first day of the week, and to denote it as the 
new day of sabbatical rest under the gospel. By 
that sabbatical rest which the apostle says, " re- 
maineth to the people of God," these writers un- 
derstand, accordingly, this supposed first day sab- 
bath, — a rest, which christians enter into, and enjoy 
in this world. According to this view of the pas- 
sage, the leading design of the apostle is to exhibit 
the excellency of the gospel, its freedom from a spi- 
rit of bondage, and that peace with God and spiritual 
rest which flow from the belief of the truth, in con- 



268 

trast with the burdensome yoke, and servile state, of 
the former dispensation.^ 

Any one who is at the pains of examining the 
scope of the context, will readily perceive that this 
interpretation greatly perplexes the whole passage, 
by rendering the meaning of the writer, which of 
itself seems very plain, extremely involved and ob- 
scure : besides this, it is open to the serious objection 
of materially injuring the apostle's argument, making 
it obviously incorrect and inconclusive. The rest of 

*■ We are not aware that this view of the passage has been adopted by any 
modern commentator of any note. — See Doddridge, Macknigkt, Scott, Stuart, 
Sfc. 8jC. in loc. It was very prevalent however, during the seventeenth century, 
and was maintained with great zeal and erudition by Dr. John Owen, and se- 
veral other learned divines of the same school. It was adopted also by Glas, 
and by some others of the most eminent of the early English and Scotch In- 
dependents. — See Owen on Hebrews, in loc. — Glas's Works, vol. Ill, p. 356. 

While these learned congregationalists, however, held this opinion, and acted 
on it themselves, they knew their own principles too well, to allow them to 
think of inferring from this sabbatism, (which they contended pertained to the 
believers of the gospel exclusively,) the conclusion that civil governments are 
bound to enforce the observance of what is called a christian sabbath, on a pro- 
miscuous population. " It was a great profanation of the sabbatism of the peo- 
ple of God," says the last mentioned writer, " to oblige the nations to keep the 
first day of the week as christians, who could not therein show regard and sub- 
jection to the authority and power of the Lord Jesus, but unto that authority 
and power that constrained them to keep it, which also appointed and obliged 
them to keep many other holy days without any warrant from the New Testa- 
ment. Christ gave commission to make disciples by the gospel, and to teach 
them to observe all things, whatsoever he commanded the apostles : but he gave 
no commission to procure an observance of the things which he commanded, by 
virtue of any other authority or power, but that of his word: and all force or 
compulsion is inconsistent with the nature of the obedience he requires, and 
with the profession of subjection to him in doing the things that he says." — 

On the Three Divine Rests. 



269 

which the apostle is speaking, is plainly not that of 
the first, or any other day of the week, but one, a 
promise of which was left to the believing Hebrews 
at that time ; it was a rest into which they were 
exhorted diligently to strive to seek to enter, and 
cautioned lest any of them should fall short of it. 
As none of them had then arrived at this rest, 
though they had already believed the gospel, it 
seems very manifest that the apostle was treating, 
not of any rest in this life, but of a perfect and 
eternal rest in heaven. With this supposition ac- 
cordingly, the whole tenor of his argument accords ; 
for after showing that neither the rest of the seventh 
day, nor that in the land of Canaan, was the ulti- 
mate rest intended, but only types of it, he con- 
cludes that there was still a rest in store — a sabbatism 
remaining for the people of God. '^The apostle, in 
his conclusion, hath substituted the word sahhatismos 
for the word katapaiisis, rest, used in his premises. 
But both are proper, especially the word sabbatism, 
in this place, because by directing us to what is said 
in verse 4, it showeth the nature of that rest which 
remaineth to the people of God. It wAl resemble 
the rest of the sabbath^ both in its employments and 
enjoyments : for therein the saints shall rest from 
their work of trial, and from all the evils they are 
subject to in the present life ; and shall recollect the 
labours they have undergone, the dangers they have 
escaped, and the temptations they have overcome : 



270 

and by reflecting on these things, and the method 
of their salvation, they shall be unspeakably happy Z"' 

The word sahhatismos, which occurs in the 10th 
verse, is merely a Hebrew word with a Greek end- 
ing : that this term and the word katapausis, though 
both employed, are used as equivalent in significa- 
tion, seems to be indubitable : for if it were other- 
wise, — if the former had been used with the intention 
of expressing more than the latter, the apostle's 
reasoning would be entirely invalidated, there being 
in that case more in his conclusion than in the pre- 
mises from which his inference is deduced. 

It is no doubt true, that the believers of the gos- 
pel enjoy, even in this world, a spiritual rest through 
faith in Christ : but the enjoyment of this rest must 
ever be accompanied with fighting the good fight of 
faith, and running with patience the race set before 
them. It is also certain that this present rest in Christ 
is intimately connected with the hope and prospect of 
that future perfect rest of which the apostle treats : 
for every christian is begotten again to the lively hope 
of it, by the resurrection of Christ from the dead ; 
to the hope, namely, of an inheritance, incorruptible, 
undefiled, which fadeth not away. Of this rest, re- 
served in heaven for every true follower of Christ, 
the apostle, as has already been remarked, treats at 
large in the passage under consideration ; and con- 
cludes by proving, that it still " remains in store a 

"^ Macknight's Note in loc. 



271 

sabbatism for the people of God." Acquiescing, with 
ardent gratitude, in this conclusion, every christian 
may, in the words of the same apostle upon a diffe- 
rent occasion, with much reason exclaim, " Thanks 
be unto God for his unspeakable gift :" — for that 
present, perpetual, spiritual sabbatism, which is now 
enjoyed by the belief of the gospel of salvation ; and 
above all, for the promise and prospect of a perfect 
and interminable sabbatism beyond death and the 
grave. " Having, therefore, the promise" of this 
future sabbatism, and being already put in possession 
of that spiritual rest which is the sure pledge and 
foretaste of the ultimate realization of an eternal rest 
in heaven, surely with christian men, even in this pre- 
sent life, every day ought to be as a sabbath day. 



278 



NOTE. 

That the whole life of a christian ought to be regarded and 
passed as a holy sabbath, and not any particular part of it more 
than another, seems to have been the prevailing doctrine during 
the first four centm*ies. Of any other christian sabbath than this, 
the writers of that time appear to have been wholly ignorant. 
This, Heylin has shown at large, by numerous citations from Chry- 
sostom, Augustin, and from various others of the Christian Fathers. 
See Hieronymus in Decalog ; Justin Martyr Dial, cum Tryph ; 
Chrysost. Hom. 39 in Matt, xii ; Clemens Alexandr, Strom, lib.iv; 
and Augustin Op. passim. '* Of all the ten commandments," 
says the last mentioned writer, " that of the sabbath alone, is 
given to be kept as a figure ; which figure we are to embrace 
with our understanding, not also to set forth hy hodily ?'est. For, 
whereas, by the sabbath is signified the spiritual rest to which 
all mankind are called by our Lord himself, saying, Come unto 
me, and I will give you rest ; yet the other commandments we 
keep, without any figurative signification, in their primary and 
proper sense as they were delivered." 

On this, however, as well as on various other points, it is 
frequently a matter of considerable difficulty, to reconcile the 
Fathers, as they are called, with each other : sometimes, indeed, 
it is not a little difficult to reconcile them with themselves. The 
principal cause of the inconsistencies that appear in their writings 
respecting the sabbath, seems to have been the importance then 
attached to the decalogue ; and the difficulty found in reconciling 
the notion of its perpetuity with their non-observance of the 
fourth commandment. Irenseus, who appears to have maintained 
that the decalogue is of perpetual obligation, speaking of the 

N N 



274 



abolition of the sabbaths, says, " They were designed to teach us 
to persevere in serving God the whole day, all the time of our 
life, and to foreshow that rest of God, his kingdom, in which, 
whoever has so persevered resting from his labours, will be made 
a partaker of God's table." In other places, he speaks of " the 
times of the kingdom, as the hallowed seventh day, the true 
sabbath of the righteous," which was to begin, as he thought, 
when the world lasted six days, that is, six thousand years. 
Iren. adv. Hares. Sometimes the Lord's day is spoken of, by the 
writers of that age, as being so superior to the sabbath, as en- 
tirely to have superseded it, and at other times, as being a type 
of the millenium and heavenly rest. Origen extravagantly con- 
tends that, as manna was rained from heaven on the Lord's day, 
and as there was none rained on the sabbath, from this fact the 
Jews ought to understand " that from that time, our Lord's day 
was set above the Jewish sabbath !" 

By the small body of christians who, in modern times, have 
maintained the existing obligation of the seventh day sahhath, 
it has been supposed that their predecessors, the ancient Sab- 
batarians, feeling themselves aggrieved by the edict of Constan- 
tine, which strictly enforced the observance of the first day of 
the week, while it made no provision for the seventh, retired, 
some into Abyssinia, and others into Piedmont, where they re- 
mained until the Reformation. Whatever may be in this, it is 
certain that the practice of observing Saturday as a festival, was 
very common in the Eastern churches, at the close of the fourth 
century : according to Augustin, (cited by Bingham,) this custom 
was then generally prevalent throughout the East, and the greater 
part of the christian world. 

At this period, when it appears to have been customary to 
meet for worship and instruction both on Saturdays and Sundays, 
Athanasius, in defence of himself, for seeming to countenance 
the practice of judaizing, speaks of the day of the sabbath as 
being transferred to the Lord's day : it is manifest, however. 



275 



that though both days were at that time observed as festivals, 
they were regarded as being perfectly distinct : for there can be 
nothing more clearly attested than this, that the only day then 
known by the designation sabbath, was Saturday. Gregory, of 
Nyssa, remonstrates warmly with those who neglected to observe 
both the one and the other. " With what face," says he, " canst 
thou look on the Lord's day, who hast dishonoured the sabbath ? 
Knowest thou not that these days are sisters, and that whosoever 
doth despise the one, doth affront the other ?" When the ob- 
servance of the Lord's day, and the numerous other festivals of 
the church became universally established, it was contended, that 
these festivals were holy, not merely on account of the services 
performed on them ; but that in virtue of the power possessed by 
the church, they were invested with a greater sanctity than other 
days. It thus became customary to class all the greater festivals 
with the Lord's day, and to designate them sabbath days, being 
all regarded as consecrated days of rest. In what are called the 
apostolical constitutions, it was provided, that " servants were 
to rest from their labours on Christmas day, Epiphany, Passion 
and Easter weeks. Ascension day, Whitsunday, and every Lord's 
day with the sahhath^ 

The obligation of the decalogue being recognized by the Roman 
Catholic church, the observance of the whole of these, and nu- 
merous other holy days was, by some, grounded on the fourth 
commandment; and it was maintained that to engage in any 
worldly business on such seasons, was a mortal sin. The number 
of days that were thus canonized, and spent in idleness, came at 
last to be felt to be a serious evil, by the Roman Catholics them- 
selves ; the Popes however persisted in increasing their number, 
canonizing days in honour of all who became liberal benefactors 
to the church ; so that Fox, the Martyrologist, was provoked to 
complain that " they had cumbered the year with so many idle 
holydays, and the calendar with so many rascal saints, some of 
them, as good as ever were they that put Christ to death." 



276 



At the period of the Reformation, the early reformers on the Con- 
tinent, as might have been expected, strenuously opposed the greater 
number of these saint days. In the confession, drawn up hy Me- 
lancthon, at the Diet of Augsburg, to the question what we ought 
to think of the Lord's day, it is answered, that the Lord's day, 
Easter, Whitsuntide, and other such holy days, ought to be kept 
because they are appointed by the church, that all things may be 
done in order ; but that the observance of them is not to be 
thought necessary to salvation, nor the violation of them, if it be 
done without offence to others, to be regarded as a sin. " For 
they who think the observance of the Lord's day has been ap- 
pointed by the authority of the church instead of the sabbath, as 
a thing necessary, greatly err. The scripture allows that we are 
not bound to keep the sabbath ; for it teaches, that the ceremo- 
nies of the law of Moses are not necessary after the revelation of 
the gospel. And yet because it was requisite to appoint a cer- 
tain day, that the people might know when to assemble together, 
it appears that the church appointed for this purpose the Lord's 
day, which for this reason also, seems to have pleased the more, 
that men might have an example of christian liberty, and might 
know that the observance neither of the sabbath nor of any other 
day is necessary." At the same period, similar views of the sab- 
bath were advanced in this country, by the English reformers, 
Tyndal and Frith. " As for the sabbath," says the former, in his 
answer to Sir Thos. More, "we be lords over the sabbath, and may 
yet change it into Monday, or into any other day as we see need, 
or may make every tenth day holyday only, if we see cause why. 
Neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday, but 
to put a difference between us and the Jews ; neither need we any 
holy day at all, if the people might be taught without it." " Our 
forefathers, who where in the beginning of the church," says 
Frith, who wrote about three years later, " did abrogate the sab- 
bath, to the intent that men might have an ensample of christian 
liberty. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be 



277 



reserved, in which the people should come together to hear the 
word of God, they ordained, instead of the sabbath, which was 
Saturday, the next day following-, which is Sunday. And although 
they might have kept Saturday with the Jews as a thing indiffe- 
rent, yet they did much better." 

Such appear to have been the prevailing opinions respecting the 
sabbath, on the Continent and in England, at the early period of 
the Reformation. Owing, however, to the decalogue being still 
recognized by the reformers as in some sense the rule of human 
duty, the popish doctrine was by many retained, that the Lord's 
day, and all the other holy days, ought to be kept as sabbaths, in 
obedience to the fourth commandment. In the Book of Prayer 
set forth in the last year of Henry VIII., the fourth command- 
ment is curtailed as follows : " Remember that thou keep holy the 
sabbath day," and in the General Confession, enumerating the 
violation of each of the commandments, that on the fourth states, 
" I have not sanctified the holy days, w^ith works which be accep- 
table unto thee," When the commandments were added to the 
English Liturgy, the practice of enforcing the observance of all 
the holy days appointed by the church, by a reference to the de- 
calogue, appears to have become very common : by those who 
did this, however, it was at the same time maintained, that ** one 
day is no more holy than another ; for that day is always the 
most holy in the which we most apply and give ourselves to holy 
works ;" and along with this doctrine they held also, that as "the 
sabbath is a figure of that rest and quietness which they have that 
believe in Christ ; it is meet, therefore, that faithful christians 
on such days as are appointed for holy days, should lay aside un- 
holy works, and give them earnestly to religion and serving of 
God." In short, all the leading divines of that age, appear to 
have adhered to the original doctrine of the primitive church, 
namely, ' ' that the sabbath was a type of the present spiritual 
rest enjoyed by the believer of the gospel, and of the eternal rest 
that is to come." 



278 



The reader, who attaches a greater degree of importance to 
the opinions of reformed churches, and of uninspired writers, 
than we feel disposed to do ; and who may wish to ascertain the 
sentiments of several of the leading English divines, who flou- 
rished in the sixteenth and the early part of the following century, 
is referred to ''Heylin's History of the Sabbath," and to "James's 
Sermons on the Sacraments and Sabbath ;" from which works the 
principal contents of this note have been taken. 



APPENDIX. 



It is gratifying to have it in our power to remark, that though 
there has long prevailed a great diversity of opinion respecting 
the observance of a weekly day of rest, considered as a religious 
obligation, all parties seem cordially to unite in approving of 
the civil enforcement of a periodical intermission of public la- 
bour. Instead of it being desirable to procure a repeal of the 
statutes now in force, which enjoin an observance of Sunday, it 
is deserving of serious consideration, whether a revisal of the ex- 
isting statutes, with a view to remedy their partial operation, and 
to increase, in various ways, their efficiency, would not be highly 
expedient. The provisions of these statutes, having principally 
a reference to the state of things which existed in the reign 
of Charles II., at which period the greater number of them were 
enacted, are wholly insufficient to meet the exigencies of modern 
times : owing in fact, to the change that has taken place in the 
value of money since the seventeenth century, and to various 
other causes, the penalties annexed to their violation, are now little 
better than a dead letter, being seldom carried into execution ; or 
when they are, being enforced very partially, and usually on the 
poorer classes of society, by every case in which the law of the land 
upon the subject is carried into effect, there is conveyed the irrita- 
ting and injurious impression, that there is one law for the rich and 
another for the poor. It is obvious, that every municipal regu- 
lation like this, which interferes with personal liberty of action, 
ought to be founded on considerations of manifest public utility ; 
and as all its provisions ought to have for their sole object, the 



280 



general welfare of the community, so ought they to be enforced 
with the strictest impartiality. 

While we are far from intending to call in question the cor- 
rectness of the opinion, that the periodical intermission of public 
labour is an expedient political regulation, we may be allowed to 
mention, that this opinion has, with numerous other true conclu- 
sions, been rested by many, on very fallacious grounds. " There 
is nothing lost to the community," says Paley, " by the inter- 
mission of public labour one day in the week. For in countries 
tolerably advanced in population, and the arts of civil life, there 
is always enough of human labour, and to spare. The difficulty 
is not so much to procure, as to employ it. The addition of the 
seventh day's labour to that of the other six, would have no other 
effect than to reduce the price. The labourer himself, who de- 
served and suffered most by the change, would gain nothing."* 

This reasoning will hardly, we are disposed to think, bear a 
close examination. It is to be considered, that the price of la- 
bour in any country, does not depend solely , as Paley's premises 
assume, on the actual existing supply, but on the proportion 
which exists between that supply, and the means of setting it to 
work. These means consist in accumulated capital, and in the 
efficiency of labour in producing those commodities which the 
labourers consume. If these means were to remain fixed, it is 
certain, that by adding the seventh day's labour to the other six, 
the price of labour would be immediately lowered: and on the 
same supposition, it is not less certain, that by every fresh addi- 
tion made to the existing number of labourers, (and it is weU 
known, that such an increase is by the law of population, in this, 
and in every similarly situated countr}^ constantly taking place,) 
the same consequences would inevitably follow. According to 
Paley's doctrine, therefore, the price of labour must necessarily 
undergo a gradual fall, correspondent to the gradual increase of 
population, so that in a very short time, it would be whoUy 

' Moral Phi,losophy, Book v. chap. 6. 



281 

inadequate to procure for the labouring classes the necessaries of 
life. Happily, the prospects of society, gloomy as some think 
they are, are not quite so gloomy as this. It has already been 
remarked, that the rate of ^ages does not depend solely upon the 
existing amount of the population, but is determined by the ex- 
tent of the fund that exists for the maintenance of labourers, 
compared with the number of labourers to be maintained. It is 
obvious, that if the means of setting labour to Mork and of 
maintaining it, can be made to increase as fast as the population 
or supply of labour increases, the law of demand and supply, 
which determines the market price of labour, as well as of every 
other commodity, will keep up the price as infallibly at one rate 
of supply as at another. Although, therefore, the direct and 
temporaiy effect of adding a seventh portion of time to the ex- 
isting supply of labour, would be to lower the price, it does not 
necessarily follow, that this would be the permanent result. 
Paley's proposition, that there is nothing lost to the community 
by the suspension of its productive industry one day in the week, 
is obviously incorrect : for it is incontrovertible, that by an ad- 
dition of fifty-two days annually to the productive industry of the 
community, there would be an addition, somewhat correspondent, 
to its annual revenue and accumulated capital. Now, it is not 
less certain, that by the industry of the country being made one- 
seventh part more productive, there would naturally arise a 
beneficial reaction in favour of the price of labour ; inasmuch as 
the demand for labour always increases with an increase of the 
revenue and accumulated capital of the country, and cannot in 
fact possibly increase without it. 

It is no doubt very desirable, that labour should be kept up at 
such a price as wdll procure, for the labouring classes, a comfort- 
able supply of the necessaries of life : this, however, can be ac- 
complished in no other way but by increasing the annual revenue 
and stock of the community. The desirable matter, is to maintain 
a healthy proportion between the means of setting labour to 

O O 



282 



work, and the constantly advancing extent of the labouring po- 
pulation. It is manifest, that, while the productive industry of 
any country is suspended one day in seven, the law of population, 
which is increasing the supply of labour, (at a rate, for mstance, 
in England and Wales alone, of five hundred souls daily,) con- 
tinues to operate on that day the same as on any other. Now, 
as by employing the industry of the country every day, a seventh 
part would be added to the annual revenue of the country, and 
consequently to the means of setting labour to work, it is plain, 
that these means would keep pace more certainly with the natural 
increase of population than they otherwise would do, and that a 
favourable price for labour would eventually be more perma- 
nently obtained. 

The ground on which Paley and others have usuallv rested the 
popular opinion of the expediency of a periodical cessation of 
public labour, viewed in this light, seems wholly untenable. 
Placed on other grounds, there is reason to think, that the 
opinion in question will, on examination, be found substantially 
correct. It is very questionable, whether an addition to the pro- 
ductive industry of the country, proportionate to the addition of 
a seventh portion of time, could, for any considerable length of 
time, be, with safety to the community, obtained. If man was a 
mere machine, that could be repaired when overwrought, like 
any other piece of machinery, it is evident, that by employing 
the whole population day and night, without any periodical in- 
termission at all, the annual revenue of the country could be 
increased to an almost incalculable extent. Such an unremitting 
application, however, in any toilsome pursuit, would be wholly 
incompatible with the physical and moral well-being of the po- 
pulation, and would shortly produce the most disastrous results. 
At present, in the unhealthy occupations in which a considerable 
proportion of the labouring population of this country are em- 
ployed, the duration of the period of labour allowed by law, is 
considered by many intelligent men, practically conversant with 



283 

the subject, to be much too long. According to a recent calcu- 
lation, there are at least 8 or 10,000,000 of the population em- 
ployed in manufactures, or subsisting indirectly by them. In the 
close and heated atmospheres, in which a great portion of this 
vast mass are confined, it is certain that unremitting application 
to their exhausting occupations, would speedily produce physical 
and moral evils of a nature for which no more rapid acceleration 
of national wealth could possibly compensate. 

That there exists a necessity for some legislative enactment de- 
termining fixed days and hours of public labour, in order that the 
physical and moral well-being of society may be duly protected, is 
too obvious to require any formal proof. The natural and inev- 
itable operation of commercial competition, of itself renders this 
imperiously necessary. It is the interest of every manufacturer 
who has capital invested in machinery, in buildings, and in the 
raw material which he manufactures, to produce as great a quan- 
tity of commodities for the amount of capital thus invested, as he 
possibly can ; for, by increasing the production, he diminishes the 
interest of the capital he has laid out, and thus can afford his 
commodities at a lower price. Let us suppose the case of two 
manufacturers, who have each a capital of twenty thousand 
pounds invested in machinery of the same construction : the one 
works his manufactory six days in the week, and the other night 
and day the whole seven days ; the latter, it is plain, by obtaining 
a greater return of commodities than the other, diminishes pro- 
portionately the rate of interest upon his outlaid capital, which 
is part of their actual cost, and is thus enabled to undersell his 
competitor in the market. The particular time a manufacturer 
is allowed to work his machinery, is immaterial to him as an 
individual, provided all his competitors are obliged to adhere 
to the same time : unless, however, a uniform time be fixed, 
and its observance enforced by a legislative enactment, the in- 
ducements which exist for one person to work his machinery 
longer than his competitors, would naturally lead to a gradual 



284 



encroachment on the periods of repose and relaxation possessed 
by the labouring classes, until their physical and moral condition 
became injured, to an extent wholly inconsistent with a prosper- 
ous or permanently secure state of society. 

As it is the interest of the community at large, that the health 
and temporal well-being of the labouring classes be duly protected, 
it is manifest that the fixing of proper hours for public labour is a 
duty devolving on the civil legislature, the discharge of which it 
cannot neglect without entailing a lasting injur}'^ on the common- 
wealth. The apprehension that to restrict, by civil enactments, the 
time of public labour, is a violation of the principle, that all 
legislative interference in commercial concerns is impolitic, has 
been entertained, we think, without any sufficient grounds. The 
principle in question, however important and universally true, in 
reference to the means of producing national wealth, does not ne- 
cessarily apply to the means of securing the greatest happiness of 
the community. In political economy, which relates purely to 
the production of wealth, the desirableness of every measure is, 
with much propriety, estimated by this standard alone : for it 
does not fall within the province of that science, to determine 
how far the different means of increasing the wealth of the state 
which it points out, may be found conducive in the long run, to 
the general well-being of society. To political science, however, 
it belongs, not only to ascertain by what means the national 
wealth can, with the greatest facility and rapidity, be increased, 
but also to provide, that all the means employed be compatible 
with public and permanent utility. Although, therefore, the 
accumulation of the wealth of this country could be greatly ac- 
celerated, by an addition to the hours and days of labour al- 
lowed by the existing laws, if this increase of wealth could be ob- 
tained, only by the sacrifice of the health and morals of the 
people, such an increase, instead of being a public* good, would 
necessarily be a public evil. To the preservation of the health 
and comfort of the people., and the promotion of the general well- 



285 



being of the community, every means of expediting the accumu- 
lation of the capital of the country, ought undoubtedly to give 
place. 

If, as seems very generally to be believed by those most con- 
versant with the matter, a reduction of the period of labour at 
present allowed by law, would, under proper regulations, conduce 
greatly to the amelioration of the moral and intellectual condition 
of the labouring classes, the enforcement of such a reduction, so 
soon as the claims of the public expenditure admitted of the loss 
which the revenue would necessarily by the alteration sustain, 
would doubtless be an act of the truest political wisdom. As 
members of civil society, men must stand or fall together : all 
classes consequently are deeply interested in the prosperity of 
each other. If the great body of the people be allowed to con- 
tinue poor and wretched, or to retrograde in civilization, the few 
who have attained a command over the conveniences and luxuries 
of life, can possess but a slender security for the permanent en- 
joyment of their privileges. Already, owing to the heavy pressure 
of taxation on productive industry, and to the superabundance of 
labourers compared with the means of employing and maintain- 
ing them, the bulk of the labouring classes in this country are 
forced, in order to procure a supply of the necessaries of life, to 
ply at their occupations with such unremitting application, as to 
preclude, in a great measure, the possibility of their being much 
raised in the scale of moral and intellectual improvement above 
their present low position. The demoralization and physical 
evils which have arisen from this unnatural state of things, have 
now assumed an aspect which no one, who has at heart the 
welfare of his country, can contemplate without entertaining 
serious apprehensions for the consequences. We are informed, 
that the hours of labour in cotton manufactories, generally ex- 
tend from half-past five in the morning, till half-past seven or 
eight at night; with an intermission of only two hours altogether 
for meals. It is natural to expect that such a prolonged applica- 



286 



tion to an exhausting employment, in a heated atmosphere, must 
be attended with very injurious effects on the human frame. The 
consequences of these exhausting employments are not confined, it 
appears, to bodily health, but are equally injurious and distressing 
as it respects the physical and moral condition of the labourer. 
" When the operative returns home at night," says a late writer 
upon this subject, (who states that he is personally extensively en- 
gaged in manufactures,) " the sensorial power is worn out within- 
tense fatigue ; he has no energy left to exert in any useful object, 
or any domestic duty : he is fit only for sleep or sensual indulgence, 
the only alternations of employment which his leisure knows ; he 
has no moral elasticity to enable him to resist the seductions of 
appetite or sloth ; no heart for regulating his household, super- 
intending his family concerns, or enforcing economy in his 
domestic arrangements ; no power or capability of exertion to 
rise above his circumstances, or better his condition. He has no 
time to be wise, no leisure to be good ; he is sunken, debilitated, 
depressed, emasculated, unnerved for effort, incapable of virtue, 
unfit for every thing but the regular, hopeless, desponding, de- 
grading variety of laborious vegetation or shameless intempe- 
rance."^ If this representation be correct, (and we are not aware 
that it is in any degree exaggerated,) there is reason to fear that 
the distressing state of things which it so vividly pictures, cannot 
long co-exist with the well-being, or even security of the com- 
munity. If these evils, in fact, be allowed to accumulate, and to 
form the habits of the majority of the population, the employers 
must, in a short time, suffer as certainly as the employed : for, 
against the dangers which arise to the body politic from their 
existence, no political sagacity can reasonably be expected to 
provide. When society is once reduced to that ebb, that the 
mass of the population are generally debased, and wholly reckless 
about the consequences of their conduct; the security for life 

'' Enquiry into the State of the Manufacturing Population, p. 31. Ridgway, 
1831. 



287 

and property being necessarily impaired, the inducements which 
capitalists have to invest their stock in the employment of labour, 
are naturally diminished, and all the important ends which ought 
to attend the institution of civil government, become, in a great 
degree, unattainable. A superabundant population must, under 
such circumstances, rapidly and inevitably lead to a dissolution 
of the frame work of political society. 

The wealth and well-being of this country, being now in a 
very considerable degree dependent on the capital and labour 
employed in manufactures, it comes to be a deeply important and 
interesting question, whether the evils that have been found to 
accompany their increase, be their necessary result ; or whether, 
by a more judicious regulation of the hours of labour, and other 
remedial measures, these evils might not be mitigated or removed. 
On the consideration of this question, it would be unsuitable in 
this place to enter at any length ; but we may be allowed to sug- 
gest in passing, that as the subject has a vast bearing on the 
prosperity of this country, the attention of the public mind cannot 
be too soon directed to its serious consideration. It is gratifying 
to notice, that those who are best qualified by practical know- 
ledge to judge of the matter, are not without hope, that by the 
adoption of various palliative measures, a principal share of the 
evils in question might be avoided. On this one point, the testi- 
mony of experienced men seems remarkably to accord, namely, 
that of all the remedial measures that can be suggested, the re- 
duction of the hours of labour is that on which the greatest stress 
is to be laid, inasmuch as the adoption of this remedy is abso- 
lutely essential to the success of every other. 

Desirable, however, as this measure, both in itself and in its 
consequences, may be, it is not to be forgotten, that there exist 
serious impediments in the way of its adoption, — impediments 
which it is quite necessary to remove, before such a regulation 
could with safety be enforced. It is very plain, that even the 
present protracted hours of labour are not more than sufficient to 



288 



enable the great body of the people to earn the means of a com- 
fortable subsistence. Unaccountable as, at first sight, it must to 
eveiy intelligent and reflecting mind appear, so it is, that not- 
withstanding all the advantages arising from the surprising 
mechanical inventions of the present age, at no former period, 
perhaps, did it require greater manual exertion on the part of the 
body of the people, to procure the necessaries of life. As the 
inventions referred to have facilitated, in an extraordinary de- 
gree, the production of commodities, it is natural to think, that 
the necessaries of life ought to have become before this time, so 
plentiful, and cheap, as to be within the reach of the majority- of 
the communit}'', without any exhausting and injurious bodilv la- 
bour being requisite. That with the immense productive power 
possessed by this country, a general diffusion of plenty ought to 
have existed, will, by no one who is acquainted with the means 
by which national wealth is produced, be called in question. To 
what cause then, must we attribute the absence of this abundance, 
and the necessity which still exists for the bulk of the population 
labouring for a livelihood, at the actual sacrifice of their physical 
and moral well-being ? No doubt, the source of this evil is in 
some degree to be found in the absence of habits of forethought 
and pinidential management on the part of the people themselves ; 
but it is alike mifair and impolitic to attempt to conceal, that the 
principal cause of the necessity in question is, that heavy pres- 
sure of tEixation on the necessaries of life, entailed upon the 
present generation by the wasteful wars, and extravagant sys- 
tem of government, carried on by this nation during the greater 
part of the last half century. Had it not been for the immense 
drafts made on the productive classes, during the whole of that 
period, it is little to be questioned, that long before this time, 
under a judicious and economical management of the country's 
resources, a competent supply of the means of subsistence would 
liave been within the easy reach of every member of its indus- 
trious population. 



289 



The pressure of taxation on the necessaries of life, being the 
real cause of the present depressed state of public industry, it is 
manifest, that the sole remedy for the evil which can be expected 
to be efficient, is the gradual removal of this burden from the 
productive classes, and particularly, the speedy alleviation of its 
pressure on those who are least able to bear it. It ought ever to 
be borne in mind, that, as the labouring classes compose the great 
bulk of the community, a country can be said to be really pros- 
perous or otherwise, only as these classes are well or ill supplied 
with the necessaries and conveniences of life : to the promotion 
of this end, therefore, the energies and resources of the country 
ought steadily to be directed. No civil community can con-ectly 
be said to be prosperous, or under proper management, in which 
the efficiency of labour in producing the commodities which the 
labourers consume, is not sufficient to supply the wants of every 
one who is able and willing to labour for a livelihood. 

As, in order to afford an effectual relief to the existing dis- 
tressed state of labour, it is requisite that there should be a 
gradual removal of the present pressure on the springs of public 
industry, every one who wishes well to his country, and who 
feels an interest in the amehoration of the condition of the la- 
bouring classes, must see it to be his duty, to advocate an econo- 
mical management of the nation's resources. Without a repeal 
of those taxes which raise the price of provisions, and limit 
proportionately the market for the produce of labour, the popula- 
tion will inevitably advance too rapidly for the extent of the fund 
by which labour is employed ; and that reduction of the hours of 
public labour, which is allowed to be so necessary to the protec- 
tion of the health of the people, as well as essential to the success 
of all extensive and efficient plans for improving their moral and 
intellectual condition, must be abandoned as impracticable. 

To secure an increase of the efficiency of labour, is thus the 
primary and principal object which it is desirable to see accom- 
plished. If this object be attained, various important means of 

P P 



290 



advancing knowledge and civilization can with facility be put in 
operation ; — without securing this end, no material alteration in 
the present protracted and demoralizing period of public labour, 
can with safet)" be adopted. Difficult as the attainment of the 
object mentioned no doubt is, we trust the ulterior purpose to 
which it is a necessary preliminary, and the collateral advantages 
that would attend its realization, are too important to be ever lost 
sight of by the enlightened philanthropists of this country. We 
may be allowed to remark, that we feel disposed to attach a more 
than ordinary degree of importance to the suggestion of a better 
regulation of the hours of public labour, on account of the increased 
facility which such an arrangement would afford for adopting 
efficient means for securing the education of the labouring classes. 
Of all existing national wants, we look upon this, namely, a 
proper system of public instruction maintained by the state, to be 
that, of which the community stands in the most urgent need. 
Unless indeed, some more efficient means of educating the people 
than those at present in operation be adopted, we conceive there 
can be no rational expectation entertained of the permanent well- 
being of this country. It is an incontrovertible fact, that not- 
withstanding the immense sums which have been annually levied 
on the industry of the nation, for the professed pui-pose of pro- 
moting the religious instruction of the public, up to this present 
hour, the education of the people, in the proper sense of the 
expression, has been wholly neglected. It is w^ell known to all 
those w^ho have given the subject any degree of attention, that 
the public teachers of religion, who have been so richly endowed 
by the state, for communicating instruction, have not reached 
more than a fraction of the labouring population : the fact indeed 
is becoming too palpable to be longer concealed from any one, 
that the great body of the people, who have needed instruction at 
the public charge most, have been hitherto allowed to grow up 
in all the grossness and ignorance of brutish barbarism. Not 
only in the dense population of large towns, has this popular ig- 



291 



norance and vice been springing up, and spreading its baleful 
influence on society : — recent events have in no unequivocal 
language told us, that in the agricultural districts, the condition 
of the labouring classes is still more deplorable. In these dis- 
tricts, says the Report of the British and Foreign School Society 
for the present year, " the most debasing ignorance prevails to 
an extent, which could not be credited, were it not verified by 
the closest investigation. The facts which have been elicited 
respecting the moral and intellectual state of those counties which 
have been disgraced by riots and acts of incendiarism, are truly 
affecting, and yet they are but a fair representation of the actual 
state of our peasantry. We call ourselves an enlightened nation, 
an educated people, and yet, out of nearly seven hundred prisoners 
put on trial, in four counties, upwards of tivo hundred and sixty 
were as ignorant as the savages of the desert — they could not 
read a single letter. Of the whole seven hundred, only one hun- 
dred and fifty could write, or even read with ease ; and (in the 
words of one of the chaplains to the gaols,) " nearly the whole 
number were totally ignorant with regard to the nature and 
obhgations of true religion." 

It will be well if the danger with which the country has been 
threatened from this quarter, become the means of effectually 
arousing public attention to the consideration of the deeply 
important subject of the public instruction of the people. It is 
manifest, that whatever services of a private religious nature, the 
endowed teachers of religion may have rendered to that compara- 
tively small section of society, whose religious opinions have 
allowed them to make use of these stipendiary spiritual ministra- 
tions ; the present corporate body employed by the state, viewed 
as a public means of spreading useful knowledge, has proved an 
entii-e failure. "The authority of a church establishment," says 
one of the most enlightened among the modern advocates of such 
institutions, " is founded on its utility :" it is " a scheme of 
instruction," the single end of which is, "the preservation and 



292 

communication of religious knowledge. "c Weighed in the balance 
of general utility, we apprehend the costly church establishment of 
England, considered simply as a means of communicating instruc- 
tion, will be found greatly wanting. What great services to the 
body of the people, it may with propriety be asked, have been 
secured, by the immense portion of the public industry, that has 
been expended on this overgrown corporation ? We certainly 
look in vain for any important civil benefits which it has conferred 
on the community : and it is to be remembered, that it is in men's 
civil character, and not at all in their religious opinions, that the 
commonwealth is interested. In as far as the advancement of 
society in the arts of civil life, and the promotion of that know- 
ledge which qualifies men for the proper discharge of their duties 
as citizens, is concerned, it will be difficult, we think, to show- 
that the expensive ** scheme of instruction" at present employed 
by the state, has not been as valueless in its operation, as it is 
glaringly unjust in the means, by which it seeks and obtains 
public support. We assuredly envy not those, who are in duty 
bound to prove, that the state possesses a right to compel men, as 
free citizens, to contribute to the propagation of religious opinions, 
to which, as individuals, they are conscientiously opposed. Neither 
should we be in any wise anxious to have the somewhat onerous 
task imposed on us, of proving the equity of appropriating a consi- 
derable portion of the nation's industry to a religious object, in 
which, only an inconsiderable section of the community are 
interested ! It is high time that the state should confine itself to 
its proper province, in providing for the temporal well-being of 
the people, and leave men to worship their Maker according 
to their own sense of religious duty. It is plainly the dic- 
tate alike of common sense and common equity, that those 
individuals who chuse to employ religious teachers, ought to 
pay them themselves, as they pay their own lawyers and phy- 

" Paley's Moral Philosophy, Book vi, Chap, x. 



293 



sicians : it will be difficult to show, that the state possesses 
any better right to allocate a portion of the public revenue to 
such a private purpose as the remuneration of the teachers of a 
particular religious sect, than it would have to apply a portion of it 
to the support of certain physicians, who, it might be, were in va- 
rious places, exclusively employed by the higher classes of society. 
It has not been one of the least of the disadvantages that have 
attended the employment of the present religious establishment, 
as "a scheme of instruction," that confiding too implicitly to its 
operation, the public have been led to neglect the proper means of 
diffusing instruction altogether. It is every day, however, 
becoming more and more apparent, that the well-being of the 
commonwealth can have no other basis than the general educa- 
tion of the people ; and we trust the day is not distant, when 
efficient means for securing this object, will be put into operation 
throughout the whole of the British Empire, It can scarcely be 
requisite to remark, that it is alike the interest and the duty of 
the state, to make a due provision, for ensuring a proper civil 
character among the whole body of the people. In free govern- 
ments, where the people possess the liberty of practically express- 
ing their political opinions, there can be no other security for the 
stability of the commonwealth, than the consent of the governed : 
and the procuring of this can be looked for, only from the diffusion 
of the knowledge, that all the members of the community are alike 
interested in the adoption of equitable laws, and in the strict and 
impartial enforcement of them. There is no instrument now to be 
confided in, for securing the obedience of the people, save that of 
the diffusion of political knowledge. Men, indeed, cannot possibly 
be good citizens, in the correct sense of the expression, until they 
are made acquainted with the foundation and objects of civil 
government; for without the possession of this knowledge, they can 
neither be expected to yield to the laws a steady obedience, nor to 
exercise, with requisite judgment, those political rights with which 
they may be entrusted. So long as the object pursued by any 



294 



government, is the correct one of the good of the public at large, 
there need be little apprehension entertained of the effects of popu- 
lar influence, provided only, the population be duly qualified for the 
prudent exercise of the poorer they possess. That the people 
should be qualified for the appreciation and judicious exercise of 
their privileges, is manifestly an object, in which the whole com- 
munity are interested. As men rise in the scale of civilization, 
they feel a growing sense of liberty of thought, and independence 
of character, which not only makes them more resolute and self- 
denying in resisting the enticements of corrupt influence, but also, 
more acute in detecting the covered designs of the selfish, and 
sophistical demagogue ; as well as more temperate and impartial 
in the formation of their own political opinions. 

Viewed therefore, purely as a matter of political expediency, 
the instruction of the rising race is a matter of such paramount 
importance, as it respects the permanent well-being of the state, 
that it must plainly be the interest of the community to provide 
for it at the public charge. The expense which would be incurred 
by instituting an eflacient system of national instruction, when 
compared with the advantages accruing to society from its opera- 
tion, is too inconsiderable to merit any particular consideration : 
so far indeed, from it entailing any serious additional expense on 
society, there are grounds for believing, that what any country 
saves by not employing a requisite number of schoolmasters and 
schools, it ultimately expends fourfold, in additional police, and 
bridewells, and gaols. A mere tithe of the immense portion 
of the productive industry of this countr}^ hitherto allocated to 
the purpose of maintaining in splendour the endowed teachers of 
religion, would be more than sufficient to provide the elements of 
education for all the labouring classes of society. 

" The education of the common people," says Adam Smith, "re- 
quires, perhaps, in a civilized and commercial society, the attention 
of the public, more than that of people of some rank and fortune. 
The parents or guardians of such, are generally sufficiently anxious 



295 



that thev should acqnire every accomphshraent which can recom- 
mend them to the public esteem, or render them worthy of it It 

is otherwise with the common people. They have little time to 
spare for education. Their parents can scarce afford to maintain 
them even in infancy. As soon as they are able to work, they 
must apply to some trade, by which they can earn their subsis- 
tence. That trade too, is generally so simple and uniform, as to 
give little exercise to the understanding ; while, at the same time, 
their labour is both so constant and so severe, that it leaves them 
little leisure, and less inclination to apply to, or even to think of 
any thing else. 

But though the common people cannot, in any civilized society, 
be so well instructed as people of some rank and fortune ; the 
most essential parts of education, however, to read, write and 
account, can be acquired at so early a period of life, that the 
greater part, even of those who are to be bred to the lowest 
occupations, have time to acquire them, before they can be 
employed in those occupations. For a very small expense, the 
public can facilitate, can encourage, and can even impose upon 
almost the whole body of the people, the necessity of acquiring 
those most essential parts of education. 

The public can facihtate this acquisition, by establishing in 
every parish or district, a little school, v^here children may be 
taught for a reward so moderate, that even a common labourer 
may afford it ; the master being partly, but not wholly paid by the 
public ; because if he was wholly, or even principally paid by it, 
he would soon learn to neglect his business. In Scotland, the 
establishment of such parish schools, has taught almost the whole 
common people to read, and a veiy great proportion of them to 

write and account If, in those little schools, the books by 

•which the children are taught to read, w^ere a little more instruc- 
tive than they commonly are ; and if instead of a little smattering 
in Latin, wiiich the children of the common people are sometimes 
taught there, and which can scarce ever be of any use to them. 



296 



they were instructed in the elementary parts of geometry and 
mechanics ; the Hterary education of this rank of people would 
perhaps be as complete as can be. There is scarce a common trade, 
which does not afford some opportunities of applying to it the prin- 
ciples of geometry and mechanics, and which would not therefore 
gradually exercise and improve the common people in those prin- 
ciples, the necessary introduction to the most sublime, as well as 
to the most useful sciences. 

The public can encourage the acquisition of these most essen- 
tial parts of education, by giving small premiums and little badges 
of distinction, to the children of the common people who excel 
in them. 

The public can impose upon almost the whole body of the people, 
the necessity of acquiring the most essential parts of education, by 
obliging every man to undergo an examination or probation in 
them, before he can obtain the freedom in any corporation, or be 
allowed to set up any trade, either in a village or a town 
corporate. "'I 

Under a general system of tuition, constituted on this or some 
similar principle, it is obvious, that the elements of education 
might be placed within the reach of the whole population at a 
very inconsiderable expense : it is manifest also, that by the use 
of a few simple expedients, they could, in a certain sense, be 
forced on the reception of that portion of the rising race, who 
might be so debased in character, as to be unwilling to avail 
themselves of the advantages tendered them. By local or district 
schools being planted over the whole country, and in every quarter 
of our crowded towns, the most favourable opportunities would 
thus be afforded for training the people in those habits of industry, 
of forethought, and mental application, (habits which alone 
deserve the name of education,) that are so essential to individual 
success in life, as well as absolutely requisite for the due performance 

'' Wealth of Nations. — Book v Chap. i. 



297 



of those relative duties which devolve on men as members of civil 
society. Those who had arrived at an advanced stage of tuition, 
might with propriety be made acquainted with the elements of 
economical and moral science ; and in this way correctly initi- 
ated in the knowledge (to them invaluable knowledge) of the 
causes which determine the rate of wages in any country, as also 
of the various circumstances on which the well-being of the 
labouring classes depends. Other branches of knowledge, it 
is obvious, might be taught them with much advantage : the 
specification of these, however, — the proper means of securing 
qualified preceptors, — the difference between teaching well, and 
teaching ill, and numerous collateral points, are topics of too 
extensive and important a nature, to admit of more than 
being alluded to in this place. We shall content ourselves 
with expressing it to be our well-weighed conviction, that unless 
some more efficient means than those hitherto employed in the 
instruction of the people be put in operation, so that the ad- 
vantages of an education suited to men's respective circumstances 
in life, shall be extended to, and secured for every member 
of the community, no political measure, however good and im- 
portant in itself, will ever raise this highly favoured country 
to that pitch of prosperity, to which its natural resources, its 
immense productive power, and the industry and enterprise of 
its people, are calculated to advance it. Nothing short of the 
adoption of a general system of public instruction, supported at 
the public charge, and founded on the broad principles of na- 
tional utility, will ever remove the existing load of popular 
ignorance, and overtake the existing and growing wants of our 
densely-planted population. 



THE END. 



HARiaSON AND CROSFIELD, PRINTERS, MANCHESTER. 



Cm 



^M 



^mu 



^^ym, 



:^r^^^^m: 












'^^-^— — » 



^ j>2'. 



:>r^2?5:> 
























^1* 






*#^ 
^>^ 

-J*^:)^- 









^^^:§,* 









W^M 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologK 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIC 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 






^c^^ 



bnam 









^5 



>3C»2 









^^I 



pcw^ 



^&m^ 



^^^'-^—"^ii 















^ot 



MIS 



^irn^ 






SI 



65i»^ 















^.^^^ 



1^ 



i.^.^. 



^xs>"^^^^^< 



=^^««Tr!« ^~> >-> 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



II I II! 



014 625 162 6 



